'h^ 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


4 


*^f    ""% 

w 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


IM 


M 

2.2 


"  Bi£  ill  zg 


1.4 


1.8 


1.6 


v] 


<^ 


/2 


A 


'W 


.^ 


7^ 


^m 


'  Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


<v 


■^\^ 


'<? 


<x 


ri> 


2;}  WEST  MAIN  STREE^ 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


y4i 


^ 


%'  ^^ 


1^  €^, 


w. 


L<? 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microreproductions  /  institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  histcriques 


C^ 


^%s 


V 


©1981 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Notes/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographiques 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  availaljle  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


7\ 


n 

D 
D 
□ 

n 


n 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couleur 

Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagee 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur§e  et/ou  pellicui^e 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 

Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 
£ncre  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noira) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relie  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serree  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distortion  le  long  de  la  marge  int^rieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajoutdes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
rnais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  ^t6  filmees. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppl^mentaires; 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  dtd  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mdthode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiqu^s  ci-dessous. 


I      I    Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couleur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommag6es 


□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurdes  et/ou  pellicul^es 


Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
^  I    Pages  d^color^es,  tachet^es  cu  piqui^es 


□    Pages  detached/ 
Pages  d^tach^es 


D 


Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


I      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


Quality  in^gale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  supplementaire 

Only  edition  aveilable/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure, 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmees  d  nouveau  de  facon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  imaqe  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  tlie  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film6  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqud  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


Mtm^mki 

1  ^ 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


tails 

du 
Ddifjer 

une 
Tiage 


Th  '     jpy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  tne  generosity  of: 

La  Bibliothdque  de  la  Villa  de  Montreal 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Original  copies  In  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  —^(meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 

Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


L'exemplaire  film6  fut  reproduit  grAce  d  la 
g6n6rosit6  de: 

La  Bibliothique  de  la  Villa  de  Monttial 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  6t6  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  et 
de  la  nettet6  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papiei'  est  imprimde  sont  filmds  en  commenpant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmds  en  commenpant  par  la 
premidre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'illustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaitra  sur  la 
dernidre  image  de  chaque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  — ♦-  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 

Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  dtre 
filmds  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffdrents 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6,  il  est  filmd  d  partir 
de  Tangle  supdrieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n^cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mdthode. 


rrata 
o 


)elure. 


J 


32X 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

^"^^•i 


\ 


V 


Papers  on  Prohibition 


BY 


GEO.  J.   LOW, 


RECTOR   OF   ST.    PAUL'S   CHURCH, 


ALMONTE,  ONTARIO,  CANADA. 


REPUBLISHED   FROM   THE  BR0CK7ILLE  (ONTARIO)    TIMEa  WITH  THE 
PERMISSION   OP  THE  AUTHOR. 


>  «  ♦!< 


NEW  YORK: 

The  United  States  Brewers'  Associatiom. 

1887. 


11 


■ilipll 


J 


Papers  on  Prohibition 


BY 


GEO.  J.   LOW, 


RECTOR    OF   ST.    1    .UL'S    CHURCH, 


ALMONTE,  Ontario.  Canada. 


REPUBLISHED   PROM   THE   BROUKVILLE  (ONTARIO)    TIMES  WITH   THE 
PERMISSION   OF   THE   AUTHOR. 


I  I  ♦  »"•- 


NEW   YORK 
The  United  States  Brewers'  Association. 

1887. 


t' 


IN  DEX. 


PAGES. 

Letter  to  G.  Thomanu,  Esq ,_- 

Papers  on  Proiiujition  : 

No.        I — Introductory , g.j^ 

No.      II— Prohibition  vs.  Temperance — Prohibition  anti-Chris- 
tian—Proofs thereof  in  Prohibition  Literature 13-16 

No.      Ill—"  Different  Hebrew  Words  " i6-ig 

No      IV— W.  C.  T.  U.  and  Communion  Wine 20-24 

No.       V— New  Test— Bible  and  Science — War  Notes 24-27 

No.      VI— Consumption— Heart  Disease— Bronchitis  27-31 

No.   VII—"  Science,"  a  hi  Prohibition 31-36 

No.  VIII— Prohibition  Arguments— Slavery— Beer— Egg  in  Al- 
cohol— Liebig — 2,000  M.D.'s 36-40 

No.      IX— Prohibition    Arguments    (continued)— "Uuke    men 

sneaks" ^0-43 

No.       X— r  rohibitionists'  Exaggerations 44-49 

No.     XI— Does  Prohibition  prohibit  ?— Substitutes  for  Alcohol, 

Opium,  etc 49-52 

No.    XII — Alcohol  as  a  Brain  Invigorator 52-58 

No.  XIII — Alcohol  as  a  Brain  Invigorator  {continued) 5S-62 

No.  XIV— Queries  addressed  to  Men  of  Science 62-65 

No.    XV— Summing  uji — Conclusion 06-72 

Appendix- The  First  Miracle  of  Christ  and  Prohibition  :  a  Sermon 
preached  in  St.  Peter's  Church,  Brockville,  on  the 

second  Sunday  after  Epiphanj  (17th  January),  1886,  73-79 


\ 


G.  THOMANN,  Esq.,  Manager  Literary  Bureau, 

U.  S.  Brewers'  Association. 

My  dear  Sir  : 

It  is  with  very  great  pleasure  I  accord  you  the  permis- 
sion you  ask  to  republish  my  Papers  on  Prohibition  in  pamphlet 
form  ;  and  I  accord  it  the  more  readily,  because  I  am  indebted 
to  your  valuable  publications,  with  which  you  kindly  furnished 
me,  for  so  much  of  the  matter  contained  in  these  papers  of  mine. 

Besides  yourself,  allow  me  here  to  express  my  obligations  to 
Rev.  J.  R.  Sikes,  of  Perrysville,  Ohio  ;  to  Rev.  Dr.  Carry,  of 
Port  Perry,  Ont.,  and  to  Rev.  Dr.  Jewett,  from  all  of  whose  pub- 
lications I  have  quoted  ;  and  also  to  Geo.  Bousfield,  Esq.,  of 
Glencoe,  Ont.,  for  the  loan  of  most  valuable  litemture — compila- 
tions of  statistics  on  the  subject  of  the  working  of  prohibition  in 
Maine,  Kansas  and  elsewhere,  etc.,  etc.  I  have  not  quoted  Mr. 
Bousfield's  figures,  but  have  boldly  stated  his  deductions.  I  have 
endeavored  to  write  ad  populumj  and  I  know  that,  to  reach  the 
minds  of  the  majority,  intricate  and  elaborate  arguments  and 
long  arrays  of  dry  figures  are  useless.  I  have  therefore  given 
certain  conclusions  which,  if  necessary,  can  be  substantiated  by 
an  appeal  to  your  works  and  the  figures  of  Mr.  Bousfield, 

It  is  to  me  most  painful  that  so  many  men — educated  men, 
clergymen,  physicians,  men  high  in  social  position — should  say  to 
me,  as  they  have  said  over  and  over  again  :  "  What  you  have 
written  is  quite  true  ;  we  endorse  every  word  of  it ;  but  then  it  is 
injudicious  to  write  so."  Can  it  be  "injudicious,"  in  the  right 
sense  of  the  word,  to  speak  the  truth  ?  Of  course,  it  was  "injudi- 
cious "  in  the  prophets  and  confessors  of  old  to  speak  as  they 
did  :  it  brought  no  end  of  trouble  upon  themselves  ;  but  we  have 
to  thank  their  "  injudiciousness  "  for  the  freedom  and  light  which 
we  enjoy  to-day. 

Others,  again — even  of  my  clerical  brethren — have  urged  upon 
me  :  "  We  quite  agree  with  you  ;  prohibition  is  a  mistake  and  a 


\ 


1 


great  evil ;  but  there,  hush  !  let  it  alone,  it  is  an  evil  that  will  cure 
itself."  Are  the  ministers  of  the  Gospel  to  let  all  evil  alone  on 
this  plea  ?  If  we  are  bound,  as  we  are,  by  our  Ordination  Vows 
to  "b:.nish  and  drive  away  all  false  doctrine,"  must  the  minister 
of  the  Gospel  who  honestly  believes  the  doctrine  of  prohibition 
to  be  false, — subversive  of  the  Christian  faith,  subversive  of  true 
morality,  and  productive  of  far  greater  evils  than  those  which  it 
strives  to  abolish — must  he  be  hounded  and  persecuted,  while  all 
applause  for  holy  zeal  is  accorded  to  the  minister  who  (with  equal 
honesty,  of  course,)  goes  stumping  the  country  in  favor  of  pro- 
hibitory enactments  ? 

Those  of  the  clergy  of  Canada  who  still  use,  from  conviction, 
fermented  wine  at  the  Holy  Communion,  and  withal  keep  dumb 
on  this  question  of  prohibition,  may  yet,  perhaps  be  subject  to  the 
indignities  that  were  offered  to  the  Lutheran  congregation  in 
Decorah,  Iowa,  when  a  policeman  walked  into  the  church,  for- 
bade the  use  of  wine,  and  threatened  to  arrest  the  communicants. 
This  event,  which  occurred  (14th  May,  1887,)  since  the  writing 
of  my  papers,  is  a  striking  commentary  on  the  forebodings  of 
paper  No.  4. 

There  is  another  class,  for  »vhom  one  feels  more  than  pity, 
one  feels  contempt.  I  refer  to  that  large  class  of  those  who  are 
habitual  consumers  of  mare  or  less  alcohol,  and  who  always 
intend  to  be  so,  whatever  the  law  may  be.  These  people,  never- 
theless, think  it  is  not  a  clergyman's  business  to  interfere  in  this 
matter.  They  conceive  that  a  clergyman  should  not  run  against 
the  popular  prejudice.  However,  for  their  part,  they  mean  to  get 
their  alcohol  all  the  same — surreptitiously  or  somehow,  prohi- 
bition or  no  prohib'tion — and  if  it  does  cost  them  a  little  more, 
.why,  their  pockets  can  stand  it.  "Oh,  generation  of  vipers!" 
one  is  tempted  to  exclaim,  in  the  words  of  holy  scorn  which  our 
Blessed  Lord  used  against  the  hypocrites  of  His  day.  If  prohi- 
bition is  right  then  go  in  for  it — honestly,  manfully,  whole-heart- 
edly ;  give  up  your  wines  and  beer  and  spirits  altogether,  as  you 
want  the  poor  man  to  do.  If  you  don't  intend  to  do  this,  and  yet 
advocate  prohibition — or  what  is  as  bad,  by  your  cowardly  silence 
and  apparent  acquiescence,  let  judgment  go  by  default — then  you 
are  simply  acting  the  hypocrite.  The  man  who  votes  or  works 
for  prohibition  and  yet  slyly  takes  his  alcohol — in  whatever 
shape — beer,  wine  or  whiskey — is  just  as  much  a  hypocrite  and 


' 


vil 


criminal  as  the  illicit  dealer  or  peddler  who  votes  for  prohibition 
because  it  puts  money  in  his  pocket. 

"Party  Government,"  it  is  alleged,  is  the  bane  of  all  true 
statesmanship.  We  would  suggest  that  "  Party  Government " 
must  always  be.  But  the  trouble  is  that  political  parties  cling 
too  much  to  historical  reminiscences  and  dead  issues.  The  dan- 
ger ever  lies  in  the  formation  of  a  Third  party  on  some  living 
quesMon  of  the  day.  Such  party,  finding  itself  in  the  minority 
and  yet  independent  of  both  political  parties,  is  tempted  to  sell 
itself  to  the  highest  bidder  :  and  though  insignificant  in  itself,  is 
yet  able  to  throw  its  weight  into  the  scale  of  either  of  the  oppos- 
ing historical  parties  and  so  kick  the  beam. 

This  is  the  danger  before  us.  Let  then  the  prohibition  ques- 
tion be  made  a  direct  "  party  "  question.  Let  us  for  the  nonce 
throw  aside  our  old  party  names  of  Democrat  and  Republican  in 
the  U.  S.  and  of  Tory  ai.d  Grit  in  Canada,  and  let  the  question 
be  put  fairly  and  squarely  before  the  people  :  Prohibition  or 
Christian  Freedom  ;  and  I  have  no  doubt  as  to  what  the  honest 
verdict  of  the  people  will  be. 


Yours,  very  truly, 


if 


G.  J.  LOW. 


St.  Paul's  Church  Rectory, 

Almonte,  Ontario,  Canada, 
4th  August,  1887. 


'■ 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


No.  I. 


INTRODUCTOKY. 

BY  the  kindness  of  the  editor  I  am  allowed  space  in  the  col- 
umns of  the  Times  to  express  my  views  on  the  most  moment- 
ous question  of  prohibition.  I  shall  write  very  plainly  and 
frankly;  and  I  wish  it  to  be  understood  that  whatever  appears  in 
these  papers  is  simply  the  expression  of  my  own  convictions,  for 
which  I  alone  am  responsible  :  and  I  am  ready  to  bear  that  re- 
sponsibility before  God  and  man.  The  Times  simply  accords  me 
space  to  assert  wl  ..t  I  think  sadly  needs  asserting,  in  no  timid 
tones,  in  this  critical  state  of  affairs  in  Canada.  For  this  reason — 
because  I  wish  to  avow  my  own  individual  responsibility — I  shall 
use,  oftener  than  would  be  otherwise  seemly,  the  "  first  person 
singular." 

That  I  am  an  anti-prohibitionist,  my  sermon  published  a  year 
ago  proclaimed.  I  have  not  yet  seen  a  confutation  of  that 
sermon,  but  all  such  arguments  as  its  critics  have  advanced  shall 
be  dealt  with  in  the  course  of  these  papers.* 

I  might  claim  some  indulgence,  as  the  advocate  of  the  un- 
popular side,  but  I  do  not  ask  it.  Any  reader  of  prohibitionist 
literature  knows  that  indulgence  to  those  of  adverse  views  is  not 
to  be  looked  fur  from  thence.  But  I  beg  my  readers  to  bear  in 
mind  that  it  calls  for  moral  courage  now-a-days  to  proclaim  one- 
self an  anti-prohibitior.ist.  Time  was  —and  that  scarcely  a  genera- 
tion ago — when  it  required  great  moral  courage  for  a  man  to  say 
"I  am  a  total  abstainer."  Now  the  tide  has  altogether  set  the 
other  way,  and  a  man  who  has  any  regard  for  public  opinion 
requires  some  courage  to  say,  "  I  am  not  a  total  abstainer." 

I  know,  lOO,  and  am  prepared  for,  the  showers  of  invective  and 
ill  names  that  will  be  hurled  on  me  for  the  stand  I  mean  to  take. 
One  has  only  to  read  the  speeches  of  prohibitionists,  such  as 


•  The  sermon  here  referred  to  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  this  pamphlet 


10 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION, 


I 


those  of  the  Hon.  J.  B.  Finch,  to  see  what  they  can  do  in  that 
line.  But  I  cannot  help  that.  The  Master  we  serve  told  us  to 
expect  abuse  ;  and  He  Himself,  though  holy,  harmless  and  un- 
defiled,  did  not  escape  obloquy.  His  enemies  could  find  no  fault 
in  Him  save  one;  they  called  Him  a  "drunkard."  "Behold  a 
gluttonous  man  and  a  wine-bibber,  a  friend  o^  publicans  and 
sinners  " — and  He  says,  "  If  they  have  called  the  Master  of  the 
house  Beelzebub,  how  much  more  shall  they  call  them  of  his 
household." 

I  know,  too — and  this  I  do  feel  most  keenly,  it  is  the  most 
painful  part  of  all  to  me — that  I  shall  incur  the  reproaches  of 
many  who  have  had  tenible  experiences  of  the  evils  of  intemper- 
ance. I  know  that  many  wives,  many  mothers,  many  daughters 
are  to-day  rendered  miserable,  plunged  in  despair  through  the 
wreckage  in  life  of  their  husbands,  or  sons,  or  brothers  from  the 
excess  of  drink  ;  and  who,  naturally  enough,  see  the  only  cure 
for  all  this  frightful  state  of  things,  the  panacea  for  all  these  dis- 
astrous evils,  in  the  prohibitionist  cry  :  "  Ftop  the  traffic."  I  know 
there  are  men,  too,  who  suffer  in  the  same  way  ;  for,  alas  !  there 
are  drunken  mothers  and  wives  and  daughters,  as  well  as  sott'sh 
men.  I  know  there  are  Christian  temperance  women  who  will  be 
ready  to  cry  :  "  You  are  thwarting  and  undoing  our  work  !  You 
are  placing  temptation  before  our  boys,  whom  we  are  trying  by 
our  new  legislation  to  shield  from  danger  !  "  I  grant  that  this  is 
the  most  painful  consideration  of  all  in  approaching  this  subject ; 
this  it  is  which  has  shut  the  mouths  of  many,  who  yet  cannot  en- 
dorse this  new  policy  of  prohibition.  But  it  is  high  time  that  in 
this  matter,  which  is  rapidly  becoming  a  national  and  political 
one,  we  should  learn  to  speak  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and 
nothing  but  tne  truth  ;  and  putting  mere  sentiment  and  feeling  to 
one  side,  follow  th  t  truth  wherever  it  leads  ;  for  out  of  truth 
only  can  ultimate  good  come. 

Yes,  Christian  mothers,  what  I  am  going  to  say  will  bring 
danger  before  yorr  boys.  But  danger  is  the  lot  of  man  ;  your 
boys  will  be  surrounded  with  danger  whatever  their  sphere  in  life. 
There  is  danger  in  alcohol,  I  freely  admit,  just  as  there  is  danger 
in  everything. 

How  many  mothers  are  there  that  are  ready  to  curse  the  noble 
river  that  flows  at  our  doors  ?  And  no  wonder  ;  for  its  waters 
have  engulfed  many  a  precious   and   promising  young  life.     I 


INTRODUCTORY. 


II 


deeply  sympathize  with  their  feelings.  But  still  I  say  to  you, 
young  men  : — Go  upon  that  St.  Lawrence  ;  go  and  paddle,  and 
row,  and  sail,  and  swim.  How  many  mothers  are  there  that 
dread  the  very  sight  and  name  of  a  railroad,  because  their  boys 
have  been  crippled  for  life,  or  crushed  to  death  !  I  feel  for  them 
keenly  ;  and  yet  I  say  to  you,  young  men  :  Go  and  work  on  the 
railroad  ;  go  and  couple  cars,  and  ride  on  the  death-dealing  loco- 
motive ;  fulfil  your  duties,  no  matter  what  the  danger.  How  many 
mothers  are  there  who  weep  and  refuse  to  be  comforted  because 
their  loys  lie  buried  in  the  battlefield  !  It  is  a  sad  and  awful 
thought.  Still  I  say  to. you,  young  men:  Go  and  learn  your 
drill,  and  fight  for  your  country  when  she  calls.  How  many 
a  mother  curses  the  day  when  gunpowder  was  invented,  as  she 
thinks  of  the  ghastly  accident  that  happened  to  her  boy  !  It  is 
quite  natural.  I  appreciate  her  sentiments.  Still  I  say  to  you, 
young  men  :  Go  and  hunt  and  shoot.  Only  in  all  these  cases — 
whether  on  the  water,  or  among  railroad  cars,  or  handling 
weapons  of  destruction — take  care  ;  exercise  your  vigilance,  your 
self-control,  your  manliness.  And  so  I  tell  you,  young  men,  re- 
garding aicohol.  The  danger  is  before  you  to-day  in  spite  of  all 
the  Scott  Acts.  If  ever  the  system  of  prohibition  is  perfected,  it 
will  rot  be  till  long  after  you  are  in  your  graves.  You  can  get 
alcohol  to-day,  and  to-morrow,  and  all  the  time,  surreptitiously, 
sneakingly,  if  you  cannot  openly.  Alcohol  is  a  most  tremendous 
force — there  is  danger  in  it  as  in  all  forces.  But  I  call  upon  you 
not  to  shirk  danger,  but  to  face  it,  battle  with  it,  master  it.  My 
experience  recalls  hundreds  of  men,  now  living  upright,  noble, 
godly  lives,  who,  from  their  earliest  years,  have  been  iccustomed 
to  see  wine  and  beer  on  their  fathers'  tables,  and  have  partaken 
of  the  same  from  their  very  childhood  ;  and  again  my  experience 
can  point  to  many  miserable  sots,  who  were  brought  up  in  strict 
"  temperance  "  homes. 

No,  fleeing  from  danger  is  not  the  right  course  ;  true  man- 
liness belongs  to  those  who  "  out  of  the  nettle  danger  "  can  pluck 
the  flower  of  benefit  and  use.  That  is  the  kind  of  education  that 
I  feel  the  youth  of  Canada  needs. 

Only  the  other  day  I  read  in  the  Canada  Citizen,  that  the 
church  which  used  fermented  wine  in  the  Holy  Communion  in- 
troduced the  communicant  to  "the  first  step  in  the  downward 
path — the  first  step  of  the  drunkard." 


m 


■ 


12 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION 


\'. 


Well,  be  it  so.  I  wish  to  tell  you,  young  men,  that  at  the 
altars  of  the  Church  of  England  you  will  never  taste  anything  c  oC 
than  fermented  wine.  Yet,  in  the  name  of  God,  we  invite  you 
to  that  Holy  Table.  "As  the  ministers  of  Christ  and  stewards  of 
the  mysteries  of  God,"  and  speaking  by  His  authority,  we  invite 
you  to — the  first  step  of  the  drunkard  ! 

Now,  what  do  you  think  of  that .''  I  will  tell  you  what  I  think 
of  it.  There  is  a  struggle  impending  between  prohibition 
and  Christianity,  and  the  question  will  ultiruately  have  to  be 
raised  in  our  politics  : — Who  is  on  the  Lord's  side  ?  I  would 
never  think  of  taking  up  this  question  of  prohibition,  except  that 
I  feel  that  it  is  a  question  in  which  tho  truth  of  God  and  of  His 
word  is  involved.  It  is  an  insult  to  our  Lord  and  Master  ;  it  is  a 
device  of  Satan  to  undo  the  work  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  for  we 
know  he  has  often  "transformed  himself  into  an  angel  of  light." 
The  Mail  newspaper,  which  has  lately  made  such  a  fuss  about 
"The  Bible,  the  whole  Bible,  and  nothing  but  the  Bible,"*  is 
at  the  same  time  advocating  measures  which  are  in  direct  opposi- 
tion to  the  whole  genius  and  spirit  of  the  Bible.  If  the  Af ail's 
prohibition  principles  prevail  it  will  have  to  get  up  a  new  volume 
of  "  Scripture  Selections  "  compared  with  which  the  far  famed 
Ross  Bible  f  will  be  a  trifle. 

If  prohibition  were  a  mere  political  party  scheme,  I  should  be 
the  last  to  touch  it ;  but  when  men  encroach  upon  the  doctrines 
and  truths  of  the  Word  and  Church  of  God,  under  cover,  however 
Pharisaic,  of  a  regard  for  morals,  it  is  lime  for  ministers  of  His 
Word  and  Church  to  speak  out.  My  object  will  be  to  prove  that 
Almighty  God  did  not  make  a  mistake  in  not  enjoining  prohibi- 
tion ;  for  I  shall  set  myseif  to  show  that  the  principles  of  prohi- 
bition are  opposed  to  the  Word  of  God  ;  opposed  to  liberty  and 
progress ;  opposed  to  science  ;  opposed  to  the  experience  and 
history  of  the  world  ;  and  degrading  and  demoralizing  to   the 

*  I  wish  I  could  believe  in  its  sincerity  ;  but  only  last  May  it  had  some  leading  articles 
of  such  a  violently  agnostic  type,  and  speaking  so  seornfiUly  of  the  Scriptures,  that  I  felt  it 
my  duty  to  reply  to  them  in  my  sermons. 

t  The  "Ross  Bible"  was  a  volume  of  selections  from  Scripture,  which,  after  being 
approved  of  i)y  the  ministers  of  the  various  denominations,  including  the  Roman  Catholics, 
was  authorized  by  the  Ontario  Government  to  be  used  in  the  schools  instead  of  the  whole 
Bible.  The  Hon.  Mr.  Ross,  the  Minister  of  Education,  was  thereupon  violently  assailed  by 
the  Mail,  the  organ  of  the  Opposition,  as  trucliling  to  the  Roman  Catholics.  About  the 
*a.ne  time  the  Mail  censed  from  becoming  a  "  party  "  organ,  and  it  now  poses  as  Protestant 
and  prohibitionist. 


H 


INTRODUCTORY. 


13 


community.  I  shall  essay  to  answer  every  argument  I  ever  heard 
of  in  its  defence — and  I  have  read  a  good  deal  of  prohibitionist 
literature — and  to  show  that  Canada  is  just  now  suffering  from  a 
blizzard  of  prohibition  violence  that  is  doing  vast  harm.  In  en- 
deavoring to  cast  out  the  unclean  spirit  of  drunkenness  by  such 
unrighteous  means,  we  are  letting  in  seven  devils  more  wicked  than 
itself,  so  the  last  state  of  this  fair  land  of  ours  will  be  worse 
than  the  first. 


No.  II. 

PROHIBITION     m.     TEMPEEANCE — PROHIBITION     ANTI-CHRISTIAN — PROOFS 
THEREOF   IN  PROHIBITION  LITERATURE. 


Throughout  these  papers  I  intend  to  use  the  terms  "  Prohibi- 
tion "  and  "  Alcohol."  I  shall  not  use  more  than  is  necessary  the 
word  "  Temperance,"  for  it  has  been  sadly  prostituted  and  made 
to  do  duty  in  all  sorts  of  dubious  ways.  And  I  shall  talk  of 
alcohol — because,  though  I  fully  concur  with  the  Liberal  Tem- 
perance Union  in  desiring  to  see  fermented  liquors  preferred  to 
distilled,  yet  I  freely  concede  to  the  prohibitionist  that  the  active 
principle  of  them  all  is  one  and  the  same.  Alcohol  is  alcohol 
whether  in  cider  or  in  brandy  ;  and  if  its  consumption  is  wrong 
in  principle,  then  the  rich  man  sipping  his  champagne  is  just  as 
guilty  as  the  poor  man  taking  his  glass  of  whiskey  and  water.  It 
is  alcohol,  under  whatever  guise,  which  is  brought  before  the  bar, 
and  it  is  alcohol  for  which  I  plead. 

Again,  I  would  not  for  a  moment  cast  the  slightest  aspersion 
upon  any  of  the  temperance  societies.  When  acting  within 
legitimate  limits,  they  are  doing,  and  have  done,  good  work. 
I  would  not  and  I  do  not  cast  any  reflection  on  those  who  feel 
it  to  be  their  duty  or  their  interest  to  abstain.  I,  at  least,  will 
strive  to  keep  my  part  of  St.  Paul's  injunction  (Romans  xiv,  3), 
"  Let  not  him  which  eateth  despise  him  that  eateth  not."  I 
would  that  prohibitionists  observed  their  share  of  that  text  :  ''  Let 
not  him  that  eateth  not  judge  him  that  eateth."  And  here  let 
me  pay  my  tribute  of  admiration  in  this  particular  (for  I  have  the 
misfortune  of  not  being  a  disciple  of  his  in  other  respects)  to  the 
manly  Christian  utterances  of  Hon.  Edward  Blake,  in  his  speech 


m 


14 


PAPERS  OA'  PROHIBITION. 


on  "  Prohibition,"  reported  in  the  Globe  of  loth  January,  He,  at 
all  events,  carries  out  St.  Paul's  injunction  :  total  abstainer  as  he 
is,  he  can  say  :  "  I  have  no  sympathy  whatever  with  the  abuse 
poured  on  those  honest  men  who  ....  are  not  yet  convinced  of 
the  duty  of  total  abstinence.  There  are  among  these  many  better 
men  than  some  of  those  who  abuse  them."  For  such  utterances 
he  has  had,  as  a  matter  of  course,  abuse  heaped  on  himself. 

Now,  apart  from  all  other  considerations,  I  object  to  these 
good  people  trying  to  monopolize  the  word  "temperance." 
This,  by  the  way,  does  not  apply  to  the  "  Church  of  England 
Temperance  Society,"  for  this  society  differs  from  all  others  in 
that  it  admits  non-abstainers  to  its  membership.  By  this  course 
it  declares  that  one  need  not  be  a  total  abstainer  to  be  a  tem- 
perate man,  and  so  implicitly  condemns  prohibition.  But  all  other 
'*  temperance "  societies  would  confine  the  term  to  the  total 
abstainer.  Now,  as  I  have  said,  I  find  no  fault  with  a  man  for 
abstaining ;  it  may  be  his  duty  to  do  so  :  I  find  no  fault  with  him 
for  taking  a  vow  to  that  effect :  I  find  no  fault  with  him  for 
joining  in  a  brotherhood  with  others  like-minded,  any  more  than 
I  find  fault  with  those  who  elect  to  take  the  vow  of  celibacy. 
There  is  a  great  deal  more  said  in  the  New  Testament  about  the 
advantages  of  celibacy  {e.  g.  I.  Cor.  vii)  than  there  is  about  the 
advantages  of  total  abstinence  from  alcohol :  in  fact  there  is 
nothing  at  all  said  about  the  latter.  There  is  a  good  deal  said  in 
the  New  Testament  about  the  spiritual  advantages  of  renouncing 
all  right  to  property  [e.  g.  S.  Matt,  xix.  Acts  ii,  iv)  "for  the 
Gospel's  sake."  These  doctrines  are  well  understood  in  Catholic 
Theology  as  "Counsels  of  Perfection"  (Matt,  xix,  ii,  12,  21,  25, 
26),  that  is  to  say,  these  counsels  are  intended,  not  for  Christians 
universally,  but  for  those  specially  called  to  such  a  life — not  for 
the  many  but  for  the  few.  Our  Blessed  Lord  did  not  enjoin 
universal  communism  when  he  said  to  the  young  man,  "  If  thou 
wilt  be  perfect  go  and  sell  all  that  thou  hast."  I  have,  then, 
nothing  but  respect  for  those  who  out  of  love  for  God  and  desire 
to  devote  their  lives  to  his  service  take  vows  of  celibacy,  and 
band  themselves  into  communities  to  further  their  aims.  But  I 
do  object  to  one  thing — it  is  a  small  matter,  perhaps,  it  may  seem 
like  a  mere  wrangling  about  words  ;  still  "  little  leaks  may  sink 
great  ships."  I  object  to  their  calling  this  vow  of  celibacy  by 
the  name  of  the  vow  of  "  chastity."     Now,  I  submit  that  the  bride 


PROHIBITION  vs.  TEMPERANCE. 


15 


and  bridegroom,  as  they  stand  before  the  altar,  take  the  vow  of 
chastity  just  as  much  as  any  celibate.  I  know,  of  course,  that  it 
is  only  used  in  what  may  be  called  a  technical  sense  ;  but  the 
technical  sense  is  too  apt  to  become  the  conventional  one.  And 
so  I  object  to  the  terms  "  temperance  "  and  "  chastity  "  being 
appropriated  by  those  specialists  ;  bt  ause  temperance  and  chas- 
tity are  of  universal  obligation  ;  but  such  "  temperance  "  and  such 
"chastity,"  if  universally  practised,  would  speedily  put  an  end  to 
the  human  race. 

I  hope,  then,  it  is  perfectly  understood  that  I  wage  war,  not 
with  any  legitimate  efforts  to  diminish  drunkenness,  but  with 
prohibition.  I  am  glad  the  question  has  now  shaped  itself  into 
one  of  national  prohibition.  For  a  long  time  one  could  feel  that 
all  the  "  temperance  "  talk  was  shaping  that  way.  Now  "  tem- 
perance "  has  at  last  shown  the  cloven  foot ;  it  has  told  us  what  it 
means  to  accomplish,  and  we  can  fight  it  on  that  plain  issue. 
And  I  first  charge  against  prohibition,  that  it  is  not  only  un- 
scriptural  but  anti-scriptural.  I  shall  not  dwell  on  this  point  at 
greater  leng.h  than  is  absolutely  necessary  (my  published  sermon 
has  given  the  outlines  of  the  argument).  But  to  show  the  insidi- 
ous nature  of  this  new  propagandism — to  show  that  its  tendency 
is  to  lower  the  tone  of  Christian  faith,  and  make  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  subservient  to  itself,  I  quote  two  eminent  prohibitionist 
authorities  : 

1.  The  Rev.  J.  Benson  Hamilton,  of  the  Cornell  Memorial 
Meth.  Epis.  Church,  Chicago,  in  a  lecture  on  "  God's  wine,  man's 
wine  and  the  devil's  wine  "  thus  delivers  himselt  : 

"  If  "  (mark  the  "  if  ")  "  the  Bible  commends  wine-drinking 
and  thus  intemperance  !  the  Lord  Jesus  cannot  be  my  example." 

2.  The  second  instance  {Iwrresco  re/erens)  is  from  the  Chris- 
tian Advocate  of  the  M.  E.  C.  in  the  U,  S.,  edited  by  Rev.  C.  H. 
Fowler,  D.D.,  L.L.D.  "  If"  (mark  the  "if"  again)  "Christ  made 
alcoholic  wine.  He  must  be  put  on  his  trial,  not  as  a  sot,  but  as 
a  moderate  drinker,  who,  according  to  the  law  of  human  nature 
with  so  many  illustrations,  was  possibly  saved  from  becoming  an 
example  for  sots  by  being  crucified  in  early  manhood." 

Now  I  will  not  stop  to  dilate  on  the  horrible  blasphemy  of  the 
above  ;  for  what  do  such  prohibitionists  care  for  the  third  com- 
mandment or  any  of  the  ten,  if  it  interferes  with  their  new  com- 


lb 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


m 


mandment,  "  Thou  shalt  not  take  alcohol  ?"  I  simply  beg  my 
readers  to  observe  this  :  that  these  two  authorities  avow  them- 
selves "Christians  if  you  please,  but  prohibitionists  first."  Their 
faith  in  Christ  is  contingent  upon  its  being  satisfactorily  proved 
that  He  was  a  total  abstainer.  This  can  never  be  done,  and  the 
amount  of  exegetical  gerrymandering  that  has  been  indulged  in 
to  distort  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  to  suit  the  views  of  those 
who  confess  that  they  cannot  believe  in  Christ  unless  He  were 
a  total  abstainer,  is  a  disgrace  to  our  common  Christianity.  It 
shows,  if  nothing  else,  how  degrading  and  demoralizing  prohibi- 
tion is. 

Thank  God,  the  Church  of  England  will  have  none  of  this 
scandalous  word-twisting.  She  has  proclaimed — in  England,  in 
the  United  States,  in  Canada,  her  abhorrence  of  this  dishonesty, 
this  "handling  the  Word  of  God  deceitfully."  Every  priest  of 
the  Church  is  bound  to  celebrate  and  administer  the  Holy  Eu- 
charist in  fermented  wine.  Thank  God,  our  faith  in  the  Lord 
Jejus  Christ  does  not  depend  on  the  legerdemain  of  these  novel 
"exegetes."  With  us  it  is  Christ  first,  and  the  "commandments 
and  ordinances  of  men  "  nowhere. 


No.  III. 

"different  HEBREW  WORDS." 


We  now  come  to  the  consideration  of  this  tremendous  argu- 
ment of  the  prohibitionists  about  there  being  "  different  Hebrew 
words  to  express  different  kinds  of  so-called  wine  ;"  and  let  us  see 
what  are  the  facts  of  the  case. 

There  are  three  Hebrew  words  regarding  intoxicants  to  which 
we  shall  confine  our  attention.  Some  four  or  five  other  terms  are 
used  by  the  later  writers,  but  only  casually,  and  they  do  not  affect 
the  argument  either  way  : 

I.  "Shekar" — which  occurs  22  times  in  the  Old  Testament 
and  is  rendered  (generally  in  the  authorized,  uniformly  in  revised 
version,)  by  "strong  drink."  Its  verbal  root  in  all  Semitic  lan- 
guages signifies,  "to  be  drunken."  There  is  no  mistake  about 
this  word.  It  means  intoxicating  liquor  of  any  kind,  including 
wine. 


DIFFERENT  HEBREW  WORDS. 


«7 


see 


lan- 
out 
ing 


2.  "  Tirosh  " — which  occurs  3S  times.  Of  these  it  is  used  34 
times  in  connection  with  "  corn  "  or  "  oil,"  or  both,  as  signifying 
the  annual  products  of  the  land.  The  juice  of  the  grape  as  soon 
as  expressed  was  called  "  Tirosh,"  just  as  we  call  the  juice  of  the 
apple  as  soon  as  expressed  "  cider."  When  the  word  occurs  else- 
where than  in  the  above  connection  it  is  rendered  in  our  version 
"  new  wine  "  or  "  sweet  wine."  It  was  "  Tirosh  "  which,  as  our 
Lord  says,  (Matt,  ix,  17)  men  never  put  into  old  wine-skins,  be- 
cause of  its  fermenting,  alcoholic  properties.  But  that  this  **  new 
wine  "  did  itself  intoxicate  is  shown  in  Hosea  iv,  11. 

3.  "Yayin" — this  was  wine — genu,  le,,  old,  unmistakable  fer- 
mented wine,  which  had  passed  its  "  Tirosh  "  stage.  The  differ- 
ence is  well  shown  in  Mich,  iv,  15.  The  authorized  version  says  : 
Thou  shalt  .  .  .  tread  sweet  wine  but  shalt  not  drink  wine." 
The  revised  version  says :  *'  Thou  shalt  tread  .  .  .  the 
vintage,  but  shalt  not  drink  the  wine."  Hebrew,  "  Thou  shalt 
tread  .  .  .  the  Tirosh,  but  shalt  not  drink  the  Yayin." 
This,  by  the  way,  was  not  as  a  matter  of  "  prohibition  "  but 
as  the  part  of  a  terrible  curse.  This  word  "  Yayin  "  occurs  no  less 
than  141  times. 

It  was  "  Yayin  "  which  made  Noah  drunk  (Ger .  ix.)  It  was 
Yayin  which  Melchizedec,  priest  of  the  Most  High  God,  "  brought 
forth  "  along  with  the  bread.  It  was  Yayin  and  ^hckar,  "strong 
drink  "  which  the  law  permitted  the  Israelites  to  buy  and  consume 
if  they  felt  inclined  (Deut.  xiv,  26.)  It  was  Yayin  which  Eli 
unjustly  supposed  that  Hannah  had  been  drinkinj;  (i  Saml.  i,  14.) 
It  was  a  bottle  (a  Avine  skinful)  of  "  Yayin  "  which  that  same 
Hannah  brought  as  a  thank  offering  to  the  House  of  the  Lord  (v. 
24.)  It  was  Yayin  "  which  maketh  glad  the  h(,'art  of  man  "  for 
which  the  psalmist  praises  God  (Ps.  civ,  15).  It  was  Yayin  which 
the  book  of  Proverbs  tells  us  is  "a  mocker"  (Prov.  xx,  i)  and 
cautions  us  not  to  tarry  long  at  (Ch.  xxiii,  30)  .'.nd  yet  bids  us  ad- 
minister "  unto  those  that  be  of  heavy  hearts,"  (Ch.  xxxi,  6)  :  and 
so  on  through  the  whole  Old  Testament.  , 

And  then  again,  as  if  to  protest  again  this  hair-splitting  about 
fermented  and  unfermented  wines,  when  any  man  took,  for  a  cer- 
tain time,  the  Nazarite  vow  of  total  abstinence,  he  was  forbidden 
to  touch  anything  whatever  connected  with  the  grape  or  the  vine 
itself.  (Numbers  vi,  2,  3,  4).  At  the  fulfilment  of  his  vow  he 
"  may  drink  Yayin  "  (v.  20). 


i8 


PAPERS  ON  prohibition: 


# 


And  once  more.  It  was  *^Yayin"  and  not  ^* Tirosh,"  \\h\ch 
always  formed  the  "drink  offering,"  a  necessary  adjunct  of  every 
sacrifice,  (Numb,  xv,  2-7,  xxix  pixssim)  along  with  the  "meat 
offering  "  of  cakes  or  wafers  of  unleavened  bread.  (Lev.  11.)  In 
one  verse,  as  if  to  emphasize  the  character  of  the  wine,  the  "  drink 
offering  "  is  called  Shekar — strong  drink.  (Numb,  xxviii,  7,  re- 
vised version).  So  "bread  and  wine,  which  the  Lord  hath  com- 
manded to  be  received  "  have  always  been  most  important  features 
in  the  worship  of  God  from  the  time  of  Moses.* 

Now  what  argument  do  the  Christian  prohibitionists  urge 
against  all  this  ?  The  main  reason  in  defence  of  all  their  word- 
juggling  is  much  the  same  wherever  it  appears,  and  is  embodied 
in  a  short  letter  criticising  my  sermon  and  signed  E.  B.  which  ap- 
peared in  the  Recorder  of  6th  March,  1886.  The  argument  may 
be  summed  up  thus  : 

The  Bible  cannot  encourage  or  allow  anything  intrinsically  and 
absolutely  evil.  But  the  consum.ption  of  alcohol  is  '.itrinsically 
and  absolutely  evil.  Therefore  the  Bible  cannot  countenance  the 
consumption  of  alcohol.  But  the  Bible,  we  admit,  does  speak  ap- 
provingly of  the  consumption  of  wine  and  strong  drink  of  some 
kind.  Therefore  the  wine  and  strong  drink  spoken  of  with  favor 
must  have  been  devoid  of  alcohol.  Otherwise  the  Bible  and 
Christianity  must  be  rejected.  (So  say  the  two  authorities  quoted 
on  page  15). 

Now  our  answer  to  this  is  that  the  second  of  the  above  prem- 
ises (viz.  that  alcohol  is  absolutely  evil)  is  begging  the  question. 
It  is  a  baseless  assumption.     I  deny  the  proposition  in  tote. 

E.  B.  speaks  of  the  impossibility  of  our  Blessed  Lord  encourag- 
ing "a  purely  selfish  indulgence."  I  deny  that  it  is  "a  purely 
selfish  indulgence."    We  shall  take  up  this  subject  later  on. 

But  E.  B.  adduces  an  argument  for  prohibition  from  Scripture, 
which  is,  I  think,  original  ;  at  any  rate  it  is  put  in  a  unique  way. 
I  quote  it  verbatim  : 


*  Of  course  this  is  only  a  condensation  of  the  argument  from  the  Old  Testament.  Those 
who  would  wish  to  see  it  treated  learnedly  in  full  are  recommended  to  read,  Wines  of  the  Bible, 
by  Rev.  C.  Bodington,  S.  P.  C.  K.  ;  Covimunirn  Wine,  by  Rev.  Dr.  Jewett,  (jChurch  Guar- 
dian office,  Montreal) — Rev.  Dr.  daxxy^s Exposure ^  &c.,  (Rowsell  &  Hutcheson).  And  to  those 
who  may  be  prejudiced  against  Anglican  authorities,  and  indeed  to  all,  I  would  strongly  recom- 
mend The  Biblical  Reason  why  Prohibition  is  Wrong;  by  Rev.  J.  A.  Sikes,  an  Evangelical 
Lutheran  minister,  of  Perryville,  Ohio,  himself  o  total  abstainer  and  temperance  luorker.  All 
these  pamphlets  together  would  not  cost  much  over  a  dollar. 


DIFFERENT  HEBREW  WORDS. 


«9 


,'ay. 


Those 
'iibU, 

■those 

Icom- 

plical 

AU 


"  Is  there  not  a  curse  connected  with  the  very  first  account  we 
have  of  wine  drinking  ? "     (This  refers  to  Gen.  ix,  20-27). 

Now  I  admire  the  ingenuity  of  that  argument ;  I  admire  the 
way  it  is  put  ;  interrogatively,  you  see.  It  is  so  innocent,  so  non- 
committal, so  "child-like  and  bland." 

Yes,  brother  E.  B.,  there  is  "  a  curse  connected,"  &c.,  &c.  You 
were  quite  right  to  say  "  connected  with  the  uccount."  If  you  had 
said  '*  a  curse  attached  to  the  very  first  wine  drinking  "  that  would 
have  been  another  affair.  But  you  said — very  properly — "  a  curse 
connected  with  the  account,"  (v.  25).  But  you  forgot  to  mention 
that  there  were  also  two  blessings  (v.  26,  27),  so  according,  to  your 
own  reasoning  the  blessings  as  compared  with  the  curses  "  con- 
nected with  wine  drinking"  are  as  two  to  one. 

And  now  let  me  ask  you,  E.  B.,  on  whom  did  the  curse  fall? 
Not  on  the  drunken  Noah,  for  he  "  awoke  from  his  wine  "  in  the 
spirit  of  prophecy  ;  a  prophecy  which  h?s  been  wonderfully  ful- 
filled to  the  present  day.  We  shall  allude  to  it  again  by-and-bye. 
Now,  God  forbid  i\  at  I  should  condone  the  drunkenness  of  to-day 
by  extenuating  the  conduct  of  Noah,  but  I  conceive  the  Bible  gives 
us  here,  in  its  own  terse  and  vivid  style,  an  account,  not  only  of  the 
first  wine  drinking,  but  of  the  first  wine  making.  Noah  partook 
of  this  newly-discovered  liquor  and  found  it  exhilarating — he  took 
more  and  got  intoxicated — he  took  still  more  and  became  stupi- 
fied.  It  was  a  new  experience  ;  he  erred  through  ignorance.  Be 
that  as  it  may,  the  sin  was  seemingly  not  imputed  to  him  (Rom.  v, 
13)  for  he  "awoke  from  his  wine  "  in  the  spirit  of  prophecy.  But 
on  whom  did  the  curse  fall  ?  Not  on  Shem  and  Japhet,  those  two 
noble  sons  who  covered  their  father's  failing  with  the  mantle  of 
charity,  and  who,  in  perfoiming  their  filial  act,  took  good  care  not 
even  to  be  witnesses  of  their  father's  disgrace.  No  ;  the  curse  fell 
on — the  informer — "  Ham  the  father  of  Canaau  " — the  man  who 
went  and  "told."     Oh  yes,  E.  B.,  there  was  "a  curse  connected 


with  the  very  first  account  we  have  of  wine  drinking." 
ment  you  on  your  ingenuity. 


I  compli- 


so 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


No.  IV. 


W.   C.   T.   U.  AND  COMMUNION  WINE. 


Is  there  not  a  cause  ?  Is  it  not  time  that  a  stand  was  made 
against  the  encroachments  of  prohibition  ?  This  week's  paper  will 
mainly  consist  of  the  foUov.'ing  prohibitionist  tract.  It  came  to 
me  along  with  other  temperance  leaflets,  through  the  post,  from  (I 
believe)  the  office  of  the  Canada  Citizen.  The  italics  are  mine. 
In  all  other  respects  the  tract  is  reproduced  unchanged. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  USE  OF  UNFERMENTED  WINE  IN  THE  SACRA- 
MENT OF  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 

A   TAPKK   RRAD   AT  THR  W.   C.   T.   U.    IIV   MISS  S.   WILLMOTT. 


r  .K 


fi* 


The  vine  in  Eastern  lands  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  choicest 
blessings  that  God  had  bestowed  upon  his  people.  Its  fruit,  while 
most  delicious  to  the  taste,  was  exceedingly  nutritious  and  con- 
ducive to  health.  Therefore,  in  Scripture  it  frequently  symboli/.cd 
the  richness  and  fulness  of  the  gospel  feast.  It  grew  luxuriantly, 
and  produced  prodigious  clusters  of  grapes,  as  reported  by  the 
messengers  who  were  sent  to  spy  out  the  land  of  Canaan. 

Palestine  was  indeed  a  land  of  vineyards,  and  as  the  heritage  of 
obedience,  it  is  said  :  "  They  shall  sit  every  man  under  his  vine  and 
under  his  fig-tree." 

We  do  not  only  gather  from  the  Bible,  but  from  other  sources, 
that  wine  anciently  was  the  mere  pressed  juice  of  the  grape,  free 
from  fermentation. 

The  Egyptians  drank  no  fermented  wine — they  believed  it  to 
be  an  invention  of  an  evil  genius — but  partook  freely  of  the  pure 
juice  of  the  grape.  As  was  customary,  the  attendant,  or  cup- 
bearer, pressed  the  juice  into  the  cup,  and  immediately  bore  it  to 
his  master  ;  this  is  corroborated  by  the  interesting  narrative  of  the 
dream  of  Pharaoh's  chief  butler.  "  In  my  dream  behold  a  vine  was 
before  me,  and  in  the  vine  were  three  branches  ;  and  it  was  as 
though  it  budded,  and  her  blossoms  shot  forth  ;  and  the  clusters 
thereof  brought  forth  grapes  ;  and  Pharaoh's  cup  was  in  my  hand  ; 


W.  C.  T.  U.  AND  COMMUNION  WINE, 


flt 


and  I  took  the  grapes  and  pressed  them  into  Pharaoh's  cup,  and  I 
gave  the  cup  into  Pharaoh's  hand." 

Notwithstanding,  every  Bible  reader  must  observe,  that  various 
wines  are  spoken  of,  and  as  so  much  is  said  of  the  evils  of  the  wine 
cup,  it  has  been  too  generally  accepted,  especially  at  the  present 
day,  that  all  beverages  bearing  that  name  must  necessarily  be  fer- 
mented, and  therefore  intoxicating,  which  was  not  the  case  ;  that 
such  wines  were  made  and  used,  all  must  admit,  but  to  affirm  they 
were  sanctioned  by  God  is  at  variance  with  the  whole  tenor  of  the 
inspired  word.  God's  heaviest  judgments  are  pronounced  upon 
the  drunkard.  The  wine  which  the  Lord  approved  was  found  in 
the  cluster,  according  to  his  own  declaration.  "Thus  saith  the- 
Lord,  as  the  new  wine  is  found  in  the  cluster,  and  one  saith.  De- 
stroy it  not  for  a  blessing  is  in  it." 

Christ  forseeing  that  the  term  "  wine  "  would  be  misunderstood 
most  carefully  guarded  the  cup  that  symbolized  his  shed  blood 
from  that  appellation.  Neither  he  nor  his  apostles  called  it  wine, 
but  "  the  cup,"  "  the  cup  of  blessing,"  "  the  fruit  of  the  vine." 

At  the  close  of  the  "Passover  Supper,"  which  Christ  had  just 
commemorated  with  his  disciples  for  the  last  time,  and  when  about 
to  fulfil  in  his  own  body  all  it  had  prefigured,  "  He  took  the  cup  (the 
passover  cup,  the  pure  juice  of  the  grape,  in  accordance  with  the 
expressed  law  of  tha^  institution  which  strictly  excluded  all  leaven 
from  the  elements  of  the  feast),  and  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he 
gave  it  to  the'u,  and  they  all  drank  of  it ;  and  he  said  unto  them  : 
This  is  mv  blood  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  many. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  I  will  drink  no  more  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine, 
until  that  day  that  I  drink  it  new  in  the  Kingdom  of  God." 

We  think  there  is  conclusive  proof,  in  which  the  highest 
scientific  authorities  agree,  that  alcohol  does  not  exist  in  the  fruit 
of  the  vine,  neither  in  its  growth,  nor  in  its  decay,  but  it  is  the  sole 
product  of  fermentation.  By  this  chemical  process  the  essential 
quality  of  the  juice  is  destroyed,  and  converted  into  an  intoxi- 
cant. 

The  art,  of  perverting  this  beneficent  God-bestowed  blessing 
into  a  curse,  most  assuredly  emanated  from  "  the  Evil  One,"  who 
employed  man  as  his  agent,  to  carry  out  his  infamous  devices. 
No  language  or  pen  can  portray  in  the  faintest  degree  the  told 
and  untold  miseries  that  have  followed  in  its  course.  Ruined 
homes,  blighted  hopes,  crushed  hearts,  the  destruction  of  the  body, 


r 


22 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


and  banishment  from  God  ;  for  it  is  written,  "  No  drunkard  shall 
enter  the  Kingdom  of  God."  We  wonder  not  this  pervertion  of 
God's  bounty  shall  call  forth  His  indignation,  and  fearful  denun 
ciations  :  "  Woe  to  the  crown  of  pride,  to  the  drunkards  of 
Ephraim  ;  the  crown  of  pride,  the  drunkards  of  Ephraim  shall  be 
trodden  under  feet."  "Woe  unto  him  that  giveth  his  neighbor 
drink!"  "Wine  is  a  mocker."  We  are  commanded  not  even  to 
look  at  it,  whtn  it  giveth  its  color  in  the  cup.  For  alas  !  "  at  the 
last  it  biteth  like  a  serpent  and  stingeth  like  an  adder  !" 

We  wonder,  with  profound  astonishment,  that  the  Church  of 
the  living  God  has  been  so  long  in  recognizing  the  imperative  duty 
of  remolding  from  the  table  of  the  Lord,  that  ivhich  we  ere  strictly 
forbidden  even  to  look  upon.  This  is  a  vital  question,  all  must  admit. 
It  therefore  demands  a  most  careful,  earnest,  and  prayerful  con- 
sideration. That  sad  consequences  have  resulted  from  the  apathy 
of  the  Church  in  this  matter,  many  affirm.  And  shall  they  be  re- 
peated ?  Shall  the  commemoration  of  that  most  precious  and 
sacred  ordinance,  instituted  by  Christ  Himself,  and  bequeathed 
as  a  legacy  to  perpetuate  his  dying  love,  be  symbolized  by  an 
element  that  contains  in  itself  the  germ  of  moral  ruin  and  death  ? 
0,  that  the  Church  would  awake  to  her  responsibilty,  and  throw 
round  the  weak  her  protecting  arm. 

Many  there  are  who  have  deprecated  the  evUs  of  Inteuiper- 
ance,  and  are  striving  to  reform,  and  have  therefore  pledged  them- 
selves "  to  abstain  from  all  intoxicants,  except  for  medicinal  and 
sacramental  purposes."  And  here  we  pause  a  moment  to  ask,  is  it 
not  hif:;h  time  this  second  reserve,  if  not  the  first,  should  be  forever 
erased  from  the  ''''Temperance  Pledge  1 " 

There  are  earnest  ones,  but  weak,  who  in  full  confidence  in 
the  ordinances  of  the  Lord's  house,  forgetting  that  through  wine 
or  strong  drink  they  have  lost  their  will-power  to  control  their  ap- 
petites, have  approached  the  table  of  the  Lord,  thereby  testifying, 
by  partakmg  of  the  emblems  of  Christ's  broken  body  and  shed 
blood,  their  faith  in  the  atonement  made  for  sin,  when,  alas  !  the 
first  sip  from  the  deceptive  cup  inflames  their  desire  for  more,  and 
they  go  on  without  power  to  resist,  until  their  sun  sets  in  tndless 
night. 

Dear  sisters,  members  of  the  Women's  Christian  Temperance 
Union,  and  all  who  are  in  sympathy  with  this  great  Temperance 
Reform,  let  us  each  and  all  awuke  to  the  duty  of  the  hour,  and  by 


fV.  a  T,  U.AND  COMMUNION  WINE. 


23 


B 


voice  and  pen,  give  no  rest,  until  the  fatal  desecration  of  the  ^^  Lord's 
Tabic  "  be  swept  away. 


'by 


Now  I  am  not  going  to  criticise  the  work  of  this  good  lady  ;  it 
.shall  tell  its  own  story.  But  I  beg  leave  to  address  myself,  on  this 
occasion,  exclusively  to  my  own  fellow-members  of  the  Church  of 
England  : 

Brethren, — We  are  all  alike  committed  to  one  line  on  this 
matter  ;  that  line  was  drawn  at  the  last  provincial  synod.  At  that 
synod  all  the  delegates,  I  believe,  clerical  and  lay,  abstainers  and 
non-abstainers  alike,  unanimously  passed  Dr,  Carry's  resolution, 
pledging  the  whole  Church  to  follow  the  ancient  customs  and  the 
Word  of  God  in  using  fermented  wine.  Now  I  ask  you  to  read 
the  italicised  portions  of  the  above.  Note  what  is  the  next  plank 
of  the  prohibition  platform  :  They  will  lay  it.  Observe  what 
is  the  next  step  of  the  prohibition  party  :  They  will  take  it. 
They  have  not  failed  in  any  step  hitherto.  I  give  them  great 
credit  for  their  boundless  energy,  zeal  and  consistency  in  carry- 
ing out  their  convictions;  they  will  not  fail  in  this  step  either. 
These  tracts  are  disseminated  by  thousands,  and  their  doctrines 
are  affecting  the  tens  of  thousands.  As  Miss  W.  says,  no  effort 
will  be  spared  ;  it  will  be  "  here  a  little  and  there  a  little,"  until  at 
last  they  will  succeed  in  imbuing  the  minds  of  all  "  temperance  " 
people  with  the  conviction  that  it  is  a  "  sin  "  to  taste  alcohol,  even 
at  the  Table  of  the  Lord.  Our  own  people  will  turn  away  from 
our  altars,  because  that  awful  thing  is  there.  I  do  not  blame  the 
prohibitionists  for  taking  this  step.  They  are  consistent,  they  are 
logical  ;  they  need  that  plank  to  complete  their  platform  ;  they 
need  that  doctrine  to  justify  the  whole  movement ;  they  need  that 
link  to  perfect  their  chain  of  reasoning,  which  was  given  in  the 
last  paper.  If  tlie  consumption  of  alcohol  is  an  absolute  evil,  the 
conclusion  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  logically  follows  ;  or  the  dreadful 
alternative  of  those  two  authorities  quoted  on  page  1  5.  The  logic 
of  events,  as  well  as  the  logic  of  reason,  points  that  way.  The 
next  prohibitory  Act  of  Parliament  which  will  supersede  the 
Scott  Act  will,  )'^«  nniy  be  sure,  erase  the  "  second  reserve."  The 
Protestant  public  will  be  educatec  up  to  it  in  the  meantime.  Re- 
member that  all  the  Methodists  (and  they  are  far  more  numerous 
than  ourselves)  are  to-day  just  as  much  pledged  to  use  unfer- 


'"  .If  "J 


it 

.           ...1 

i  P 

^      ir 

If 

(i 

n 

24 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


mented  grape  juice  in  observing  the  Lord's  Supper  as  we  are  to 
use  wine  ;  and  remember  that  such  an  amendment  will  be  a  matter 
of  perfect  unconcern  to  our  Roman  Catholic  fellow  citizens  ;  for 
their  laity  receive  only  in  one  kind  ;  as  for  their  priesthood,  they 
will,  of  course — for  they  have  the  courage  of  their  convictions — 
get  a  saving  clause  inserted  to  protect  the  integrity  of  the  Sacra- 
iiient  in  their  own  churches. 

But  we.  brethren,  what  are  we  going  to  do  ?  We  have  made  a 
big  talk  in  the  synod  about  it ;  we  have  made  big  talks  before, 
which  have  resulted  in  nothing.  What  about  this  matter  ?  We 
have  crossed  the  Rubicon,  and  planted  our  banners  with  a  great 
flourish  of  trumpets.  What  next  ?  Shall  we  watch  our  opponents 
increasing  day  by  day,  swelling  their  ranks  from  those  of  our  own 
household ;  and  then  at  last  when  we  find  ourselves  completely 
overwhelmed  by  numbers — subside  ? 


No.  V. 

NEW  TEST — BIBLE  AND  SCIENCE — WAH  NOTES. 

We  have  so  far  confined  our  attention  to  the  Old  Testament, 
because  it  is  from  thence  the  prohibitionists  have  drawn  theii 
mystifying  arguments  about  the  "  different  Hebrew  words."  Con- 
cerning the  New  Testament,  our  remarks  will  be  brief. 

I.  Our  blessed  Lord  inaugurated  His  ministry  with  the  miracu- 
lous manufacture  of  wine.     (St.  John  11.) 

2.  He  closed  that  ministry  with  consecrating  that  same  al- 
coho''c  element  as  the  sacrament  of  His  own  most  precious 
blood. 

Some  capital  has  been  made  by  the  prohibitionists  out  of  a 
quibble  that  the  New  Testament  never  actually  mentions  the  word 
"  wine  "  in  connection  with  that  "  cup."     To  this  we  answer : 

{a)  We  know  from  Jewish  authorities  what  that**  cup"  con- 
tained, viz  :  wine  i^real  wine)  and  water. 

{l>)  "  The  bread  "  and  "  the  cup  "  were  the  "  meat  offering  and 
drink  offering  "  which  attended  every  sacrifice,  as  stated  on  page  18, 
and  the  Passover  was  a  sacrifice.     (Exodus  xii,  27.) 

{c)  Whatever  that  "  cup  "  contained,  it  could  make  men  drunk. 
(i  Cor.  XI,  21.) 


NEW  TEST— BIBLE  AND  SCIENCE— WAR  NOTES.        25 

3.  St.  Paul  says:  (Eph.  v,  18)  "Be  not  drunk  with  wine." 
Why  did  he  not  say  at  once,  "  Never  touch  it  ? "  He  says  (i  Tim. 
Ill,  3,  and  Titus  i,  7)  that  the  clerical  overseer  of  the  congregation 
should  be  "not  given  to  wine,"  (rev.  version,  "no  brawler"  on 
margin,  "not  quarrelsome  over  wine"),  and  that  the  deacons 
should  be  "  not  given  to  tnuch  wine  ;  "  (i  Tim.  iii,  8)  and  that  the 
aged  should  be  "  temperate  "  (in  the  true  sense )  ;  and  that  the 
aged  woman  should  be  "  not  enslaved  to  tnuc/t  wine."  (Titus  11, 
2  and  3.)  Now,  why  this  "  much  ? "  Why  all  this  qualification  ? 
Why  did  he  not  say,  out  and  out,  "  never  touch  wine  or  strong 
drink?"  Nay,  he  even  charges  Timothy,  the  superintendent  of 
all  these  congregations,  (or  as  Ave  now  say  bishop)  who  had  been 
a  total  abstainer,  to  desist  from  that  ascetic  practice  henceforth. 
(i  Tim.  V,  23.) 

Now,  in  the  face  of  all  this,  for  prohibitionists  to  tell  us  that  the 
Bible  insists  on  total  abstinence,  is  taxing  our  credulity  too  far. 
As  a  great  English  statesman  once  said  :  "  If  a  thing  is  not  true, 
we  should  not  lie  that  it  may  he  true." 


Hitherto  we  have  been  acting  on  the  defensive ;  we  have 
shielded  ourselves  behind  the  ramparts  of  Scripture  ;  now  we 
mean  to  "carry  the  war  into  Africa,"  and  assail  the  principles  of 
prohibition  on  the  grounds  of  reason  and  science.  The  Christian 
minister  is  bound  to  defend  the  Word  of  God.  That  Word  has 
been  trifled  with  by  Christian  prohibitionists  in  such  a  way  as  to 
cause  the  agnostic  to  laugh  us  to  scorn.  Prohibition  agnostics — 
like  the  late  Mr.  D.  M.  Bennett,  of  New  York,  and  W.  McDonnell, 
of  Canada — hold  up  The  Book  to  execration  for  inculcating  the 
use  of  wine.  The  anti-prohibitionist  agnostics  pour,  and  with 
good  reason,  ridicule  upon  Christian  prohibitionists,  for  making 
"ducks  and  drakes  "  of  the  statements  of  their  own  Scriptures. 

The  prohiljition  line  of  reasoning,  which  we  have  already  out- 
lined, has  for  its  minor  premise,  "The  consumption  of  alcohol  is 
absolutely  evil."  This  we  must  disprove  or  the  conclusion  is  in- 
evitable. 

The  line  of  argument  we  pursue,  on  the  other  hand,  begins  with 
the  Word  of  God.  We  state — what  one  would  think  any  candid 
man  would  at  once  acknowledge  as  a  truth — "  The  Holy  Scripture 
sanctions  the  moderate  consumption  of  alcohol."  With  this  for 
our  foundation-stone  we  proceed  to  construct,  as  follows  : 


a6 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


The  Scriptures  cannot  sanction  an  absolute  evil,  therefore  the 
moderate  consumption  of  alcohol  cannot  be  an  absolute  evil.  But 
further,  the  Scripture  cannot  sanction  "a  purely  selfish  indul- 
gence," therefore  the  moderate  consumption  of  alcohol  is  not  "  a 
purely  selfish  indulgence."  But  we  go  further  yet — whatever  the 
Scripture  sanctions  must  be  good  in  itself,  therefore,  the  mod- 
erate consumption  of  alcohol  is  good  in  itself. 

And  then  the  thoughtful  and  educated  believer  in  Christ  must 
carry  on  that  argument  to  the  following  conclusion  :  "  Since  the 
Scripture  and  science — when  both  are  rightly  interpreted — cannot 
disagree,  therefore,  both  must  agree  in  the  previous  conclusions. 
This  it  will  be  our  next  object  to  establish.  We  begin  with  quot- 
ing a  prohibition  paper  : 

In  the  early  stages  of  the  great  Scott  Act  campaign  there  was 
issued  (March  2 2d,  1884,)  from  the  office  of  the  Montreal  Witness,  a 
small  sheet  headed  "  War  notes — sample  copy — distribute  promptly ." 
From  the  one  in  my  possession  I  now  quote.  Its  argumentative 
piece  de  resistance  had  a  glaring  caption  in  thick  type: — "Facts 
for  the  drinker  ;  scientific  investigation  of  alcohol ;  what  the 
London  doctors  report ;  one  out  of  ten  deaths  hastened  by  drink  ; 
one  out  of  twenty-five  deaths  caused  by  it  ;  terrible  havoc,"  etc., 
etc.  After  this  alarming  heading  it  gave  a  compilation  of  its  own 
out  of  i\\(i  British  Medical  Journal  iox  1883.  This  compilation 
stated  that  the  '"habitual  use  of  an  excessive  quantity  of  alcohol" 
had  accelerated  death  or  caused  it  in  the  above  proportions  in 
certain  diseases  there  specified  (chiefly  those  of  the  liver  and 
kidneys).  Now  I  should  hope  no  one  in  the  world  would  advo- 
cate "an  habitual  use  of  an  excessive  quantity  of  alcohol."  The 
Witness's  argument  amounts  to  this  :  An  habitual  use  of  an  exces- 
sive amount  of  alcohol  causes  "terrible  havoc  "  in  the  case  of  cer- 
tain diseases,  therefore  let  us  prohibit  its  use  altogether.  What 
kind  of  reasoning  is  this  ? 

But  this  is  not  all.  At  the  close  of  the  article  comes  a  strange 
admission  ;  so  striking  that  it  made  a  deep  impression  on  my  mind 
at  the  time.  Although  I  saw,  as  any  man  with  an  ounce  of  brains 
could  see,  the  non-  'uitur  of  the  War  Notes  argument,  still  I  was 
in  grave  doubts  at  the  time  whether,  after  all,  notwithstanding  the 
Bible's  sanction,  it  were  not  better  to  join  the  Scott  Act  move- 
ment— whether  a  "  purely  selfish  indulgence  "  should  not  be  given 
up   "  for   the   present   distress,"   if  we   could  thereby  stop  this 


NEli^  TEST— BIBLE  AND  SCIENCE— WAR  NOTES.        27 

"terrible  havoc" — this  shortening  of  life — on  which  prohibition 
speakers  and  prohibition  literature  so  incessantly  expand. 

But  that  next  sentence  finished  me  ;  it  knocked  all  the  Scott  Act 
out  of  me.  I  have  not  space  to  comment  on  it  now  ;  it  shall  form 
the  text  of  my  next  paper.  But  I  want  my  prohibitionist  friends, 
who,  like  myself,  are  anxious  to  stop  this  terrible  sacrifice  of  life. 
to  think  over  it  in  the  mean  time,  so  I  close  by  reproducing  it 
verbatim  et  literatim. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  intemperate  people  did  not  seem  to  die 
of  phthysis  (consumption)  in  the  same  large  proportion,  or  at  the 
same  early  age,  as  the  temperate.  Neither  did  they  die  so  soon 
of  heart  disease,  bronchitis  or  emphysema." 


No.  VI. 


* 


CONSUMPTION — UEART   DISEASE — BROXCniTIS. 


"On  the  other  hand,  intemperate  people  did  not  seem  to  die  of  phthyeis  (consumption) 
In  the  same  large  proportion,  or  at  the  same  early  age,  as  the  temperate.  Neither  did  they 
die  BO  Booi:  of  heart  disease,  bronchitis  or  emphyaema." 

In  commenting  on  the  above  let  us  remind  our  readers  of  what 
we  stated  in  our  previous  paper  ;  that  the  facts  are  drawn  from 
the  British  Medical  Review  for  1883  ;  while  the  Var  Notes  is  re- 
sponsible for  the  diction. 

I.  We  meet  with  a  little  difficulty  at  the  outset.  What  is  here 
meant  by  intemperate  and  teiiperate}  Are  these  words  used  in 
the  prohibition  sense,  or  in  piain  English  ?  This  it  would  be  very 
hard  to  determine. 

2.  "  Intemperate  people  did  not  seem  to  die."  I  like  that  word 
"i^w/,"it's  so  handy  just  there.  When  talking  about  the  "  ter- 
rible havoc  "  caused  by  an  habitual  use  of  an  excessive  quantity  of 
alcohol,  War  N'otes  could  be  very  positive.  But  when  it  has  to 
admit  how  alcohol  prolongs  life  in  certain  cases,  then  it  says  they 
don't  ''''seem  to  die."  It  is  a  good  word,  that  "seem."  Like  E.  B.'s 
question,  it  sounds  so  "  child-like  and  bland."  -.--    -       ' 

3.  "  Did  not  seem  to  die  of  phthysis  (consumption)  in  the  same 
large  proportion,  or  at  the  same  early  age  as  the  temperate  ;  neither 
did  they  so  soon  of  heart  disease  or  bronchitis." 


28 


PAPERS  ON  PROUIBITIO.y. 


%%' 


Now  I  want  my  readers  to  thoroughly  digest  this  paragraph  ;  it 
speaks  for  itself.  Then  let  them  turn  to  the  annual  reports  of 
births,  deaths  and  marriages  issued  by  the  Hon.  A.  S.  Hardy  of 
the  Provincial  Government  of  Ontario.  Let  them  observe  what 
a  fearfully  important  place  consumption  holds  among  the  "  rauses 
of  death  " — a  long  way  ahead  of  all  others.  In  the  re])Oit  for  1884 
(the  last  to  hand)  we  find  2,347  deaths  from  this  disease  ;  and 
with  reference  to  this,  the  report  says  (page  40)  : 

"If  2,347  human  beings  were  annually  killed  upon  the  rail- 
roads of  our  province,  the  legislature  would  promptly  prohibit  the 
running  of  trains.  If  a  contagious  disease  were  annually  im- 
ported into  the  province  that  swept  from  existence  2,347  living 
souls,  the  province  would  protect  every  rod  of  her  frontier  by  a 
cordon  that  would  require  an  army  of  10,000  able  men,  and  the 
expense  would  be  of  secondary  account." 

Now  turn  we  to  Heart  Disease,  first  quoting  the  following  pas- 
sage from  a  Temperance  medical  pamphlet — "Alcohol,  its  place 
and  power,"  by  James  Miller,  F.  R.  S.  E.,  &c.  ;  Glasgow  Scottish 
Temperance  League,  p.  2iZ-  (The  italics,  of  course,  are  mine  in 
these  extracts.) 

"  There  are  some  affections  of  the  heart  in  which  the  organ 
acts  with  great  feebleness  ;  the  functions  of  life  flag  in  conse- 
quence, the  general  circulation  is  insufficient,  and  danger  to  life  is 
apt  to  ensue.  Now  alcohol  is  a  stimulant  to  the  heart  and  blood 
vessels  as  well  as  to  the  nervous  system  ;  and  from  small  occa- 
sional doses,  as  with  the  ordinary  meals,  medical  experience  has 
shown  that  in  such  cases  decided  benefit  may  be  obtained." 

Now  let  us  return  to  the  reports  of  the  Registrar  General  of 
Ontario  ;  and  in  that  o^  1883  p.  49,  we  read,  concerning  heart 
disease  : — "  The  number  of  decedents  is  increasing  yearly.  In  187 1 
there  were  only  333  deaths  recorded  from  this  cause.  In  1883 
the  mortality  has  increased  to  921  or  2'j6 per  cent.  It  has  held 
either  the  fifth  or  sixth  place  in  the  highest  causes  of  death  every 
year  since  1871,  both  in  the  cities  and  in  the  whole  province." 

Let  the  reader  bear  in  mind  that  since  187 1  *otal  abstinence 
principles  have  made  enormous  strides. 

And  then  again,  consider  the  great  prevalence  of  Bronchitis  and 
the  number  of  its  victims.  Emphysema  we  shall  leave  out  of  con- 
sideration ;  its  ravages,  according  to  the  report,  being  trifling. 

Now,  on  the  admission  of  the  War  Notes,  alcohol  is  in  all  these 


CONS  UMP  T ION— HE  A  R  T  DISEA  SE— BRONCHI  TIS. 


29 


cases  a  most  powerful  factor  in  prolonging  life.  Every  household 
or  family  which  has  had  experience  of  these  dread  diseases  knows 
this.  Physicians  will  endorse  the  conclusions  of  the  British 
Medical  Review.  Now,  in  view  of  this  fact,  so  grudgingly  ad- 
mitted by  War  Noies^  so  attested  by  universal  experience,  every 
family  thus  afflicted  is,  we  submit,  bound  in  conscience  to  stop 
this  TERRIBLE  HAVOC  by  determining  that  alcohol  shall  never  be 
wanting  in  their  homes.  They  are  in  duty  bound  to  be  "  intem- 
perate," in  the  prohibition  sense.  Nothing,  of  course,  would  warrant 
them  in  being  intemperate  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word  ;  but  "  in- 
temperate," in  the  prohibition  sense,  they  should  always  be. 
There  are  some  prohibitionists,  I  know,  who  would  not  allow  this, 
such  as  Rev.  Sam.  Jones,  who,  in  Toronto,  uttered  sentiments  to 
this  effect ;  I  do  not  remember  his  exact  words,  but  anyhow  it  is 
impossible  to  put  them  in  coarser  language  than  his  own:  "  If  my 
wife  could  not  live  without  taking  beer,  I  should  say,  let  her  die." 
Most  men,  however,  I  should  hope,  would  regard  such  language 
with  horror,  as  making  the  6th  commandment  of  none  effect,  in 
comparison  with  this  new  commandment  of  men,  "  Thou  shalt  not 
take  alcohol."  Besides,  one  does  not  understand  this  blowing  hot 
and  cold  at  once  ;  this  condemning  of  alcohol  because  it  shortens 
life,  in  one  breath,  and  in  the  next  condemning  it  even  though  it 
lengthens  life. 

It  will  be  said  by  those  prohibitionists  who  do  not  altogether 
go  the  length  of  the  Sam  Jones  school :  "  Oh,  but  this  need  be 
no  objection  to  a  prohibitory  law,  for  those  who  are  so  afflicted 
can  go  to  their  doctors  and  obtain  their  orders,  and  so  they  will 
be  secured." 

Now  to  this  we  reply  :  No,  thank  you.  Why  should  we  have 
to  submit  to  this  incessant  burden  ?  Why  should  we  be  obliged 
to  go  to  the  medical  adviser  and  pay  him  a  fee  every  now  and 
again  ;  and  then  (because  this  particular  traffic  is  over  protected) 
pay  double  or  treble  prices  for  what  we  know,  just  as  well  as  the 
doctors  can  tell  us — thanks  to  War  Notes — that  our  households 
need  ?  And  the  more  so  considering  what  thousands  of  house- 
holds are  thus  dependent  on  alcohol  for  prolonging  life.  No  one 
can  have  a  higher  respect  for  the  medical  profession  than  myself, 
I  believe  the  very  study  of  physiology  has  a  tendency,  like  all  scien- 
tific pursuits,  to  make  a  man  love  truth  for  its  own  sake.  I  believe 
it  has  a  tendency  to  make  its  votaries  not  only  truthful  but  humane ; 


30 


PAPERS  OA'  PROHIBITION. 


M 


and  as  a  clergyman  I  can  bear  ample  testimony  to  the  physician's 
generosity.  But  for  all  that — as  a  Briton,  and  in  company  with 
my  fellow  citizens  of  all  classes,  Tory,  Conservative,  Liberal,  Rad- 
ical— I  am  a  lover  of  liberty  ;  and  I  believe  the  secret  of  national 
liberty  to  be  this  :  Not  to  put  too  much  power  into  the  hands  of 
any  order  or  class  of  men,  be  they  priests  or  laymen.  A  medical 
man  must  need  be  under  strong  temptation  to  advocate  prohibi- 
tion ;  for,  of  course,  any  one  can  see  what  tremendous  leverage 
it  confers  on  his  order.  It  says  very  much  for  the  honor  of  the 
profession,  that  they  have  not  succumbed  to  this  temptation. 
Highly  as  I  think  of  physicians  in  general,  still  I  know  they  are 
men  of  like  passions  with  ourselves,  and  it  is  dangerous  for  any 
class  of  men — for  doctors  no  less  than  parsons — to  be  invested 
with  too  much  power.  For  my  part,  like  that  brilliant  Irishman, 
Bishop  McGee,  of  Peterboro,  I  would  rather  belong  to  a  nation  of 
"  drunkards  "  than  a  nation  of  slaves,  whether  that  slavery  be  to 
King-craft,  Priest-craft  or  Leech-craft. 

There  are  those  (and  they  are  by  no  means  few  in  number) 
who  confess,  "I  am  '  temperate,'  you  know  ;  I  go  in  for  prohibi- 
tion ;  but  then,  don't  you  see,  I  have  to  take  stimulants  myself  be- 
cause the  doctor  orders  it  in  my  case."  I  forbear  to  express  my 
opinion  of  such  diplomacy  ;  but  I  would  ask  such  a  one  :  Do  you 
think  you  are  a  solitary  instance  ?  Do  you  not  reflect  that  there  are 
hundreds,  aye,  thousands,  that  need  it  just  as  much  as  you  do,  but 
who  cannot  afford,  like  yourself  it  may  be,  to  run  to  the  doctor  for 
his  "dispensation  "  or  his  "indulgence"  every  few  days?  And 
don't  you  know  that  the  hardened  sot,  whom  you  are  trying  to  re- 
claim, when  he  comes  to  hear  of  your  little  weakness,  will  only 
smile  ? 

There  are  others — and  they  are,  alas  !  too  many — who  are  re- 
strained by  these  prohibition  principles  from  taking  what  they 
ought  to  take  ;  men  and  women  of  sensitive  consciences,  tender 
feelings,  gentle  lives  ;  men  and  women  of  whom  the  world  is  not 
worthy ;  for  among  humanity's  sweetest  characters  and  most 
valuable  lives,  intellectually  and  spiritually,  if  not  physically,  are 
many  of  those  delicate  ones  to  whom  Providence  has  assigned 
what  French  divines  have  called  "  The  Death  of  the  Elect."  And 
they — because  of  this  jjrohibition  cry,  because  men  curse  what 
God  hath  not  cursed,  and  defy  what  the  Lord  hath  not  defied — 
are  being  hurried  into  their  graves.     A  brother  clergyman,  from 


N 


CON  SUMP  TIOxi—IIEAK  T  VI SEA  SE— BRONCHI  TIS.        3 1 

a  rural  parish,  lately  told  me  of  the  case  of  a  young  man  in  his 
cure,  of  consumptive  tendencies,  who  had  maintained  himself  in 
tolerable  health  through  the  use  of  alcohol.  When  the  Scott  Act 
came  in  force  he  determined  to  give  it  up,  rather  than  go  through 
the  tedious,  red-tape  process  of  doctor's  orders  and  all  that.  He 
sank  from  that  time  forward.  By  and  bye  the  doctor  was  called 
in.  He  prescribed  alcohol,  of  course,  but  it  was  too  late.  Now 
we  hear  a  great  deal  about  the  "  terrible  havoc  "  caused  by  alcohol. 
Prohibition  orators  love  to  talk  of  the  "  murders  "  it  commits. 
We  retort  in  their  own  language  and  say,  the  Scott  Act  murdered 
that  young  man.  5  . 

But  more  than  that ;  there  are  hundreds  of  similar  cases  to- 
day ;  khere  are  hundred?  of  individuals  who,  because  of  this  most 
unjust  stigma  cast  upon  the  consumers  of  alcohol,  forego  its  use, 
though  they  know  its  benefits,  and  are  rapidly  approaching  their 
end.  Prohibition  is  responsible  for  shortening  their  lives.  The 
results  of  prohibition  v/ith  respect  to  consumption  are  shown  fear- 
fully in  the  statistics  of  Maine,  the  pioneer  champion  prohibition 
State.  In  Ontario  deaths  from  consumption  are  eleven  per  cent, 
of  the  whole  number,  but  in  Maine  they  are  eighteen  per  cent. 

These  three  diseases,  consumption,  heart  disease,  and  bronchitis 
are  rapidly  increasing  amongst  us,  as  the  statistics  show,  and  they 
are  taking  off  their  victims  at  an  earlier  age.  And  now  I  venture 
on  a  prediction  ;  time  alone,  of  course,  will  test  its  worth  : 

These  three  diseases,  consumption,  heart  disease,  and  bron- 
chitis will  continue  to  spread  just  in  proportion  as  the  prohibition 
movement  spreads. 


No.  VII. 


"science,"  a  liA  PROniBITION.  '  - 

We  now  proceed  to  the  examination  of  the  arguments  advanced 
in  favor  of  prohibition.  Again  let  us  insist  on  the  distinction  : — 
Temperance  is  one  thing,  prohibition  another.  Voluntary  total 
abstinence  in  the  individual  is  one  thing:  enforced  prohibition  on 
all  is  quite  another  thing.  It  may  be  good,  praiseworthy,  neces- 
sary for  the  individual  to  abstain  :  it  may  on  the  other  hand  be 
prejudicial,  as  it  was  in  the  case  of  St.  Timothy,  and  as  it  is  in  the 


38 


PAPERS  O.V  PROHIBITION. 


irt- 


i 


case  of  very  many  to-day.  But  that  it  would  be  ruinous  to  the 
whole  community  to  enforce  universal  prohibition,  the  history  of 
the  world  has  invariably  shown,  and  it  is  our  object  to  prove.  We 
are  combatting  not  the  practice  of  the  individual  voluntary  ab- 
stainer, but  the  position  of  the  prohibitionist,  which  is  that  alcohol 
is  essentially  and  absolutely  evil.  Arguments  to  establish  this 
position  are  being  widely  and  zealously  disseminated  ;  tracts  with 
this  object  in  view  are  being  circulated  everywhere  ;  while  too  many 
of  those  who  know  these  arguments  are  childish  and  baseless  hold 
their  peace  and  allow  judgment  to  go  by  default : 

I.  The  favorite  assertion  of  the  prohibitionists  is  that  alcohol 
is  a. poison.  We  are  told  this  again  and  again  :  and  such  disputants 
are  fond  of  referring  to  "  science  "  as  in  their  favor.  One  would 
think  that,  however  much  they  trifled  with  Scripture,  they  were  at 
all  events  "scientific."  E.  g.,\ht  Rev.  J.  Benson  Hamilton,  who 
has  been  already  quoted  as  declaring  the  \  he  could  not  accept  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  his  example  unless  He  were  proved  to  be  a 
total  abstainer,  thus  delivers  himself: — "Science  now  declares 
that  alcohol  is  a  deadly  poison,  in  a  drop  or  in  a  barrel,  pure  or 
diluted."  One  marvels  at  the  coolness  of  this  man.  What 
"science"  has  he  studied,  I  wonder? 

Alcohol  "  pure  "  is  a  poison,  no  doubt.  So  is  common  salt,  so 
is  phosphorus,  so  is  oxygen;  and  yet  the  human  body  requires 
these  and  many  other  "poisons"  both  for  construction  and  repairs. 
Alcohol  absolutely  "  pure  "  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  obtain  ; 
oxygen  "  pure  "  can  be  obtained  with  comparative  ease.  Oxygen 
"pure  "  is  not  only  a  poison,  but  a  powerful  intoxicant :  it  would 
make  a  man  "drunk"  worse  than  whiskey,  and  an  "excessive 
amount "  would  kill  through  over-stimulation  more  surely  than 
alcohol :  and  yet  without  oxygen  "  diluted  "  in  the  air  we  breathe 
we  should  die  in  an  hour.  Nitrous  oxide,  the  gas  which  dentists 
give  us  to  intoxicate  us  before  drawing  our  teeth,  contains  only 
the  elements  of  common  air,  with  an  extra  amount  of  oxygen,  and 
yet,  plays  sad  pranks  with  our  brains.  Pure,  fresh,  wholesome  air 
contains  (to  speak  in  round  numbers)  20  per  cent,  of  oxygen  :  our 
health,  our  very  life,  depends  upon  the  air  we  breathe  containing  a 
due  proportion — but  not  excessive — of  that  "  stimulant,"  that  "  in- 
toxicant," that  "  poison  "  oxygen. 

Nature  then  teaches  us  this  lesson  :  To  take  our  alcohol  like 
our  oxygen,  7Mell  diluted.    In  fermented  liquors  this  is  the  case : 


"  SCIENCE  "  A  lA  prohibition. 


33 


The  strongest  wine  contains  only  i8  per  cent.,  and  the  lightest 
beer  about  4  per  cent,  of  alcohol.  Strong  spirits  contain  about 
50  per  cent.  It  is  the  whiskey  "  straight "  which,  like  oxygen 
"  straight,"  plays  havoc  with  men. 

In  this  connection  we  might  notice  a  harrowing  recital  of  Arch- 
deacon Farrar's,  which  often  docs  duty  on  prohibition  platforms, 
viz. :  How  he  had  seen,  in  the  back  slums  of  London,  crowds  of 
women  staggering  under  the  influence  of  gin,  and  pouring  the  same 
liquor  down  the  throats  of  their  infants.  A  horrid,  ghastly  spec- 
tacle indeed.  But  where  does  the  main  fault  lie  ?  Why  does  he 
not  see  the  same  spectacle  on  the  breezy  downs  of  England  }  The 
trouble  is,  those  poor  creatures  are  huddled  together  in  thousands 
in  a  space  so  contracted  that  the  air  is  vitiated  :  there  is  not  suffi- 
cient of  that  ''poison"  oxygen  in  it;  they  are  like  fish  on  dry 
land,  panting,  gasping,  they  know  not  why.  They  are  breathing 
air  over  and  over  again,  which  has  lost  its  stiniulating  property. 
And  so  they  take  gin  because  their  whole  system  craves  the  "stim- 
ulant" which  oxygen  should  supply.  That  is  the  primary  cause  of 
all  this  gin  drinking  in  the  back  slums.  And  who  knows  but  that 
even  in  this  most  disgusting  instance,  the  alcohol  serves  some  pur- 
pose— in  a  wretched  and  most  deficient  way,  of  course — like  all 
make-shifts .''  One  wonders  why  it  is  that  in  the  filthy,  poisoned 
atmospheres  of  the  back  slums  of  London  and  other  huge  cities 
there  does  not  periodically  break  out  the  "  Black  Death,"  or  the 
l)lague,  as  would  infallibly  occur  in  crowded  localities  under  Ma- 
hommedan  rule.  The  remarks  of  Dr.  Farr,  Registrar  of  England, 
which  will  be  quoted  hereafter,  corroborate  this  view. 

2.    Again,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Hamilton  says  : 

"  Science  is  now  the  sternest  and  harshest  advocate  of  total 
abstinence."  This  sentence  can  only  be  characterized  as  a  false- 
hood. When  and  where  has  "  Science  "  ever  uttered  such  senti- 
ments.'' Possibly  some  erratic  individual  who,  it  maybe,  signs 
M.  D.  after  his  name — like  Dr.  Richardson,  whose  assertions  have 
been  disproved  over  and  over  again — has  uttered  such  nonsense 
as  Mr.  H.  ascribes  to  him  that  *'  its  use  makes  four  times  as  many 
deaths  as  its  disuse."  But  again  we  ask  when  and  where  has 
"Science"  issued  such  an  ultimatum  as  the  above? 

Did  Mr.  H.  ever  read  Mr.  Sutton  Sharpe's  essay  in  the  Fort- 
nightly?  or  the  Times  article  of  August  14th,  1884.?  or  the  London 
Lancet oi  November,  1884.''  or  the  volume  on  "Food  and  Diete- 


34 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


..I 


tics"  of  Wood's  standard  series  of  Medical  Authors?  or  the  con- 
chisions  of  Drs.  Anstie,  Pavie,  Dupr^,  Thudicuni,  etc.  ?  or  that  of 
Dr.  Everts,  of  the  Cincinnati  Sanitarium,  who  considers  that  "  uni- 
versal abstinence  would  be  deleterious  to  mankind  by  reason  of 
brain  deterioration  V  or  the  opinions  of  the  eleven  famous  physi- 
cians, beginning  with  Sir  James  Paget,  who  contributed  to  the 
"  symposium  "  which  came  out  in  the  Contemporary,  not  one  of 
whom  advocated  universal  abstinence  ?  or  Dr.  J,  B.  Yeo's  article 
in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  March,  1886,  entitled  "  Food  Acces- 
sories," reviewing  tlie  experiments  and  researches  of  Sir  Wm. 
Roberts,  M.  D.,  of  Manchester.'  or  the  conclusions  of  J.  M. 
Fothergill,  M.  D.,  in  his  work  lately  issued,  "A  Manual  of  Diet- 
etics," wherein  he  characterizes  alcohol  as  "a  readily  o.xidizable 
fuel  food?"  or  the  article  on  "alcohol"  by  Dr.  Binz,  of  Bonn, 
Germany,  in  the  Dictionary  of  Medicine,  edited  by  Dr.  Quain, 
1 2th  edition?  Let  me  produce  some  extracts  from  this  last. 
"Alcohol :  a  material  which  is  most  readily  assimilated  by  the 
system,  and  which,  by  its  superior  combustibility  spares  the  sacri- 
fice of  animal  tissue." 

"According  to  the  experiments  of  Dr.  Frankland  and  others, 
the  burning  of  i-o  gramme  of  alcohol  yields  sufficient  heat  to 
raise  the  temperature  of  seven  litres  of  water  1°  C,  and  the 
burning  of  i  gramme  of  cod  liver  oil  suffices  for  nine  litres.  Now 
in  taking  three  tablespoonfuls  of  oil  daily  wc  yield  abort  the  same 
amount  of  warmth  to  the  body  as  is  given  by  four  tablespoonfuls 
of  absolute  alcohol,  the  quantity  contained  in  a  bottle  of  claret 
or  hock.  The  oil,  however,  is  digested  and  oxidized  by  the  organs 
of  the  body  with  difficulty,  while  for  the  assimilation  of  the 
alcohol  scarcely  any  exertion  of  the  tvorking  cells  is  required" 

"  It  can  be  demonstrated  by  calculation  ....  that 
heat  producing  material,  sufficient  to  supply  nearly  one-third  the 
whole  amount  of  warnth  ren'vjv  d  by  the  body  within  twenty-four 
hours,  is  offered  in  a  quantify  of  100  grammes  (about  3J  fluid 
ounces)  of  alcohol.    In  this  sense  alcohol  is  a  food." 

Here  is  the  reason  of  its  superiority  to  cod  liver  oil  in  cases 
of  consumption.  Again,  let  Mr.  H.  read  article  "  alcohol  "  in  the 
last  (1884)  edition  of  *' U.  S.  National  Dispensatory." 

This  list — which  could  be  greatly  increased  if  necessary — con- 
sists, V'  it  observed,  of  most  eminent  European  and  American 
physioAogists,  and  are  the  latest  authorities,  as  the  dates  will  show. 


"  SCIENCE  •'  A  LA  PROHIBITION. 


9S 


The  fact  is,  until  about  1850,  alcohol  was  almost  universally  viewed 
in  civilized  countries  as  a  valuable  article  of  diet.  But  about 
that  time,  Dr.  W.  15.  Carpenter,  in  England,  and  others  on  the 
continent,  propounded  the  theory  that  alcohol  was  not  assimilated 
in  the  system,  but  thrown  off,  at  great  expense  of  energy,  by  the 
various  organs  of  the  body,  just  as  a  thorn  or  "  sliver  "  in  the  flesh 
causes  the  surrounding  organism  to  exert  itself  to  eject  the  intruder. 
But  this  theory  was  thoroughly  exploded  by  Dr.  Anstie,  when  he 
published  (1864)  "Stimulants  and  Narcotics,"  and  again  (1874) 
"  Final  Experiments  on  the  Elimination  of  Alcohol."  Dr.  Anstic's 
conclusions  were  amply  confirmed  by  Drs.  Pavey,  Dupr&.Thudicum, 
etc.  Indeed,  Dr.  Carpenter,  the  author  of  the  exploded  theory, 
himself  abandoned  the  practice  of  total  abstinence  in  his  later  years. 

I  have  in  my  possession  a  copy  of  a  "Catechism  on  Alcohol" 
by  Julia  Colman,  published  by  the  National  Temperance  Society 
of  N.  Y.,  in  which  all  these  exploded  notions — and  a  lot  of  ab- 
surdities which  Dr.  Carpenter  himself  would  have  laughed  at — are 
taught  for  truths.  This  catechism  was  circulated  in  a  certain  An- 
glican Sunday  School  (not  mine)  without  the  knowledge  of  the 
Rector,  Now  when  those  children  grow  up  mid  learn  the  true 
state  of  things,  and  how  they  were  misguided  and  duped,  what 
think  you,  my  readers,  will  be  the  result } 

If  the  students  of  prohibition  literature  will  only  scrutinize  it, 
they  will  see  that  temperance  tracts  carefully  avoid  the  latest  au- 
thorities, but  give  us  the  opinions  of  Sir  B.  Brodie,  Dr,  Andrew 
Clarke,  and  others  who  are  behind  the  age  (and  even  they  were 
not  advocates  of  universal  abstinence)  and  Dr.  Carpenter,  who  as 
we  see,  cried  peccavi.  This  is  not  "  science :  "  it  is  not  common 
honesty. 

And  again  :  Did  Mr,  Hamilton  and  his  brother  prohibitionists 
ever  hear  of  the  great  International  Temperance  meeting  which 
was  held  in  Antwerp,  Belgium,  in  September,  1885  ?  Certainly 
the  prohibitionists  of  America  knew  of  it,  for  they  sent  their  dele- 
gates, and  at  that  time  great  jubilation  was  held,  and  bright  antici- 
pations of  the  glorious  success  of  the  "  temperance  cause  "  through 
this  gathering  were  constantly  heralded.  But  since  the  meeting 
was  held  we  never  hear  a  word  about  it.  Why  ?  At  that  great  Inter- 
national Convention,  there  were  some  five  hundred  and  fifty 
delegates  representing  some  twelve  or  thirteen  countries.  The 
continental  nations  sent  eminent  men  of  science  to  attend  it. 


36 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


England  and  America  sent — prohibitionists.  The  teetotallers  of 
England  and  America  got  sat  upon  by  such  men  of  science  as 
M.  Fred  de  Laet  and  M.  Goeman-Borgesius.  The  former  gentle- 
man, after  listening  to  the  prohibition  speeches  of  Mr.  Fortescue 
Cole,  Mrs.  Lucas,  and  Mr.  Taylor,  all  of  London,  said  in  the 
course  of  his  remarks :  "  We  have  so  often  heard  ever  so  many 
good  and  excellent  things  from  and  about  the  temperance  socie- 
ties in  England  and  elsewhere  that  we  can  easily  forego  further 
enlightenment  ....  We  are  called  here  for  the  purpose  of 
discussing  with  competent  men  from  all  countries  the  means  where- 
with to  combat  inebriety.  Moderate  temperance  societies  are  no 
doubt  one  of  those  means,  but  their  action  is  necessarily  limited. 
They  offer  us  no  social  remedy.  I  insist,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the 
speeches  of  their  representatives  be  ruled  out." 

The  prohibitionists  were  completely  ignored  by  the  whole  con- 
vention, who  laughed  at  the  idea  of  treating  all  men  as  infants 
and  imbeciles,  and  of  going  back  to  the  tyrannical  legislation  of 
the  dark  ages. 

That  is  why  we  hear  nothing  now-a-days  of  the  Great  Inter- 
national Temperance  meeting  of  Antwerp. 

"  Science  " — quotha ! 


No.  VIII. 

PROniBITIOIJ   ARGUMENTS— SLAVERY— UEER— EGG    IN  ALCOHOL — LIEBIG — 

TWO   TnOUSANP  M.  D.'S. 


We  will  take  up  a  few  more  of  the  startling  "  arguments  "  in 
favor  of  prohibition. 

I.  In  dealing  with  the  Scriptural  view,  Rev.  J.  B.  Hamilton  of 
Chicago,  (in  the  lecture  already  alluded  *o)  and  other  prohibi- 
tionists with  him,  defend  their  dishonest  word-juggling  with  the 
Bible  by  alleging  that  in  former  times  pro-slavery  men  used  to 
do  the  same.     To  this  we  answer  : 

a.  "  Two  blacks  do  not  make  one  white." 

/>.  The  love  of  personal  liberty  inherent  among  all  Christian 
nations  and  amounting  to  a  passion  with  the  English-speaking 


PROHIBITION  ARGUMENTS. 


yi 


races,  and  the  idea  that  all  men  zxtjure  divino  free  and  equal,  at 
least  seem  to  have  some  support  from  Scripture. 

c.  That  same  passionate  attachment  to  personal  liberty  and  the 
rights  of  the  indi^'idual,  which  at  last  effected  emancipation,  is 
the  very  same  sentiment  which  to-day  makes  us  resist  this  new 
slavery  of  prohibition. 

II.  "  The  constant  use  of  beer  is  found  to  produce  a  species 
of  degeneration  of  most  of  the  organism,  profound  and  very 
deceptive,"  etc.,  etc.,  etc.  So  says  an  American  school  text-book 
("  Lessons  on  the  Human  Body  ;"  by  O.  M.  Brand),  and  so  say,  in 
varying  terms,  a  whole  number  of  temperance  fly  sheets  and  tracts 
now  '    fore  me. 

Now  if  this  be  so,  one's  first  impression  is  :  What  fearfully 
"  degenerate  "  races  by  this  time  must  be  the  English  and  the  Ger- 
man, who  have  been  drmking  beer  "  immoderately "  and  con- 
stantly for  the  last  2,000  years  !  Is  it  possible  that  the  victors  of 
Sedan,  whose  skillful  strategy  and  physical  prowess  were  the 
marvel  of  the  world,  were  beer  drinkers  and  the  descendants  of 
beer  drinkers  from  the  times  of  Tacitus  ?  Is  it  possible  that  such 
a  degenerating  habit,  pursued  for  so  many  centuries,  can  produce 
a  Xaiser  Wilhelm,  a  Bismark,  a  Von  Moltke  ?  Or  do  such  men 
die  in  the  flower  of  their  youth  ?  Is  it  possible  that  this  same  land 
produces,  after  2,000  years  of  this  degeneracy,  such  profound 
and  original  thinkers  in  metaphysics,  theology  and  science  of  all 
kinds  that  the  whole  educated  world  rushes  eagerly  after  their 
writings  ? 

But  again  :  Mr.  G.  Thomann,  the  manager  of  the  Literary 
Bureau  01  the  U.  S.  Brewers'  Association — all  of  whose  valuable 
works  should  be  studied  by  those  who  wish  to  hear  both  sides  and 
form  dijust  judgment  on  this  matter — has,  in  his  pamphlet,  "  The 
effects  of  beer  on  those  who  make  and  drink  it,"  challenged  the 
prohibitionists  to  prove  the  truth  of  their  statements.  The  Brew- 
ers' Association,  on  their  part,  have  had  a  medical  examination 
made  of  no  less  than  one  thousand  workers  in  New  York  and 
Brooklyn  breweries — each  of  whom  daily  consumes  an  amount  of 
beer  that  would  frighten  ordinary  people — and  that  investigation 
has  proved  that  the  health  of  brewers  is  unusually  good  ;  diseases 
of  the  kidney  and  liver  occur  rarely  amongst  them  ;  and  their 
average  lives  are  longer  and  physical  energies  greater  than  those 
of  other  workmen.     The  challenge  has  not  been  met,  except  by 


c" 

t 


38 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


it 


vile  personal  abuse.  But  the  statistical  proof  adduced  by  Mr.  T. 
has  been  strengthened  by  a  report  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Statistics  of  Switzerland,  of  which  the  following  is  an  extract : 

During  the  years  1879  to  1885  the  average  annual  mortuary 
rate  among  Swiss  brewers  was  as  follows  : 

Age,  15,     20,     30,     40,     50,     60,     70  to  80  years. 
1.6     5.4  10.4  13.5   15.5     24         104.5 

The  mortality,  from  1879  to  1882,  among  men  of  all  callings, 
and  of  the  same  ages  as  above,  was  4.7,  7.90,  10.72,  15.31,  26.30, 
51. II.  109.22. 

III.  One  favorite  piece  of  clap-trap — for  it  is  nothing  else — 
with  prohibition  orators,  is  to  take  an  egg  and  crack  it  open  and 
pour  the  contents  into  a  tumbler-full  of  whiskey.  Thereupon 
the  albumen  gets  "  cooked  "  as  they  say  :  and  the  horrified  spec- 
tators are  informed  that  this  is  how  drinking  habits  affect  the 
brains.     Our  reply  to  these  orators  is  twofold. 

I  St.  Let  me  assure  you,  my  good  folks,  that  people  don't  take 
their  alcohol  that  way.  Now,  in  order  to  verify  your  illustration, 
you  should  take  a  man  with  good  healthy  brains,  and  crack  his 
skull  open  and  pour  the  contents  thereof  into  a  pailfuU  of  whiskey. 
I  have  no  doubt  whatever  that  under  such  treatment  said  brains 
woul'  get  badly  "cooked."  But  I  repeat,  people  don't  take  their 
ale  -ncl  that  way.  , 

2d.  Let  me  inform  you,  or  remind  you,  good  folks,  that  pre- 
cisely the  same  results  would  follow  if  you  were  to  take  and  crack 
open  an  egg  and  pour  its  contents  into  a  tumbler  of — not  whiskey 
but — tea. 

I  trust,  therefore,  good  folks,  that  whenever  you  reproduce 
that  experiment  you  will  take  care  to  supply  yourselves  with  two 
eggs  apiece,  one  for  each  of  the  beverages  named  :  or  if  you  don't 
care  to  go  to  that  trouble  you  will  at  least  add  the  remark,  "  On 
the  other  hand  a  cup  of  good  hot  tea  would  seem  to  have  the  same 
effect." 

IV.  Another  piece  of  sophistry  that  readers  of  prohibition 
literature  will  find  thrust  before  them  constantly,  in  varying  terms 
(for  prohibitionists  have  a  marvellous  faculty  of  ringing  changes 
on  one  peal)  is  :  **  Baron  Liebig  asserts  that  there  is  more  food  in 
a  grain  of  flour  than  in  any  quantity  of  alcohol."  To  this  we 
answer  : 


PROHIBITION  ARGUMENTS, 


39 


1.  Liebig's  contention  (viz.,  the  absence  of  nitrogen  in  alcohol,) 
applies  also  to  sugar  and  other  articles. 

2.  Liebig's  opinion  is  behind  the  age  now. 

3.  The  authors  already  quoted  and  many  others,  of  later  date 
than  Liebig,  have  shown  where  he  was  mistaken. 

4.  Liebig  himself  admitted  its  great  value,  along  with  oils,  fats 
and  sugar,  as  a  heat-producer,  and  he  himself  endorsed  the  ancient 
adage  that  it  was  "  the  old  man's  milk." 

V.  Another  argument  which  crops  up  continually — I  met  with 
it  (along  with  the  Liebig  statement)  in  the  temperance  column 
of  the  Mail  a  few  weeks  since  ;  and  wt  shall  encounter  it  again 
and  again. 

"  Over  2,000  medical  men  in  England  signed  a  memorial  in 
favor  of  total  abstinence." 

Now  this  clap-trap  has  been  exposed,  and  I  trow  must  yet  be 
exposed,  again  and  again.     What  are  the  facts  ? 

About  forty  years  ago — when  the  physiological  action  of 
alchohol  was  not  nearly  so  well  known  as  now — some  2,000 
medical  men  in  England  and  India  did  sign  a  certain  document 
urging  total  abstinence.  That  document  came  to  grief,  as  it 
deserved  to  do,  for  it  was  found  that  very  many  of  its  signatories 
had  about  the  same  time  signed  another  memorial  testifying  to 
the  valuable  dietetic  properties  of  some  particular  kind  of  Burton 
ale.  Many  years  after,  viz.,  in  1871,  (these  things  get  dreadfully 
mixed  up  in  the  public  mind  through  the  disingenuous  manipula- 
tion of  such  men  as  Rev.  Dawson  Burns),  another  manifesto  was 
drawn  up,  to  which  some  150  (observe  the  reduction  in  numbers) 
n>edical  names  were  attached,  stating  that  ''  many  people  im- 
*  .insely  exaggerated  the  value  of  alcohol  as  an  article  of  diet." 
'T'  's  IS  a  i'ery  long  luay  from  total  abstinence,  be  it  observed. 

But  more  than  that,  signatures  were  obtained,  even  to  this 
very  mild  document,  by  all  sorts  of 

Ways  that  are  dark  ^ 

And  tricks  that  are  vain. 

Sir  Geo.  Burrowes,  the  then  president  of  the  Roy.  Coll  Phys., 
headed  the  list,  signing  through  inadvertence,  and,  of  course, 
many  then  followed  suit.  We  all  know  ho7v  signatures  to  a  docu- 
ment can  be  obtained.  But  when  a  certain  M.  D.  refused  to  sign, 
and  wrote  expostulating  with  Sir  Geo.  Burrowes,  the  latter  had 


«.' 


Q 


40 


F  .rERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


the  candor  to  reply :  "  I  entirely  agree  with  you  in  the  opinion 
you  express  about  alcohol  as  an  article  of  diet.  I  think  that  to  a 
large  class  of  persons  in  the  climate  of  England  it  is  indispensable, 
and  I  know  of  many  remarkable  cases  in  confirmation  of  your 
own  experience.  On  the  other  hand  I  think  there  are  large 
classes  of  persons  in  more  favored  and  tropical  climates  who  may 
and  do  abstain." 

The  whole  thing  has  been  exposed  by  Mr.  Sutton  Sharpe  in 
his  article  in  the  Fortnightly,  of  November,  1884,  to  which  I  refer 
all  candid  readers  for  full  particulars. 

Still,  for  all  that,  we  shall  have  it  cropping  up  again  and  again 
that  "  once  upon  a  time  "  2,000  medical  men  signed  a  document 
advocating  total  abstinence. 

Can  a  cause  be  holy  or  righteous  which  requires  to  be  but- 
tressed by  such  ui     .^^'-'^nus  means  ? 


No.  IX. 


PnOniBITION  ARGUMENTS  (CONTINUED)   "MAKE  MEN  SNEAKS.' 


Another  argument,  which  prohibitionists  urge  in  favor  of  their 
views,  I  shall  give  in  the  words  of  the  Montreal  Star,  (temperance 
column)  of  8th  January. 

"Prohibition  robs  the  traffic  of  respectability.  It  drives  it 
into  rebellion  against  law  and  order.  It  makes  it  disreputable. 
It  brands  every  man  who  sells  and  every  man  who  buys  as  an 
outlaw.  It  makes  the  devotees  of  the  wine-cup,  the  mean,  sneak- 
ing, night-prowling  vagabonds  of  society." 

I,  myself,  have  heard  a  Methodist  minister  and  prohibition 
orator  say  on  the  platform :  "  We  don't  expect  to  exterminate 
drinking  any  more  than  we  can  exterminate  theft  or  any  other 
crime,  but  we  do  expect  so  to  legislate  that  no  man  will  be  able 
to  get  intoxicating  drink  without  becoming  a  sneak." 

Now  this  hopeful  state  of  things  (in  the  eyes  of  prohibitionists), 
is  what  makes  the  whole  movement  so  odious.  It  will  "  make  men 
sneaks" — and  that  not  the  drinkers  only.  It  will  familiarize  men 
with  "ways  that  are  dark  and  tricks  that  are  vain."  It  will 
plunge — it  is  plunging — the  whole  land  into  a  sea  of  dishonesty, 
disrepect  for  law,    lying,  perjury,  duplicity  and  craft  that  will 


•  f 


PROHIBITION  ARGUMENTS. 


41 


destroy  our  national  character  for  manliness  and  truth.  One  has 
only  to  read  the  details  furnished  by  the  Mail  as  to  how  the  Scott 
Act  is  working  in  the  various  counties,  to  see  how  it  is  driving 
men  into  "  rebellion  against  law  and  order."  In  "  branding  every 
man  that  sells  and  every  man  that  buys  as  an  outlaw,"  it  is  simply 
driving  the  traffic  into  unscrupulous  hands  instead  of  into  hands 
responsible  to  society.  It  is  not  stopping  the  traffic :  it  will  never 
stop  the  traffic :  it  has  not  stopped  it  in  Maine,  after  thirty-five 
ye  Ts  of  prohibition,  and  most  stringent  and  tyrannical  laws.  It 
has  there,  on  the  confession  of  Gen  Neal  Dow  himself,  simply 
transferred  the  traffic  from  responsible  into  irresponsible  and 
vicious  hands.  It  is  doing  the  same  thing  in  Canada,  as  the  MaiVs 
articles  have  shown.  It  can  never  stop  the  traffic,  until  it  can 
reverse  the  laws  of  nature,  and  eradicate  the  basal  elements  of 
alcohol  which  God  has  implanted  in  every  seed  and  root  and 
grain  that  grows.  It  is  not  removing  drunkenness  here,  any  more 
than  in  Maine,  as  the  reports  of  the  State  show,  and  Gen.  Dow 
himself  confesses  :  but  it  is  demoralizing  the  country  ;  it  is  making 
us  a  nation  of  "  sneaks." 

In  connection  with  this  let  me  recommend  to  all  a  pamphlet, 
entitled,  "  Pen  Pictures  of  Prohibition  and  Prohibitionists,"  by 
Rev.  J.  R.  Sikes,  the  author  of  "The  Biblical  Reason  Why,"  etc., 
referred  to  previously.  This  is  a  little  brochure  that  should  be 
read  by  all  "temperance"  people,  especially  the  ladies  of  the 
W.  C.  T.  U.     They  ought  to  see  both  sides. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  demoralizing  nature  of  prohibition, 
to  show  how  it  blunts  all  sense  of  right,  I  know  of  no  more  glaring 
instance  than  is  gathered  from  an  editorial  in  the  Globe,  of  8th  of 
January,  entitled,  "An  Amazing  Question."  It  seems  some  pro- 
hibitionist correspondent  of  that  paper  is  troubled  in  his  con- 
science, and  so  he  refers  to  the  Globe  as  his  "spiritual  director;" 
he  asks,  ought  he  to  vote  for  a  Boodler  candidate  if  that  candidate 
be  a  prohibitionist }  His  "  father  confessor  " — the  Globe — certainly 
gives  him  good  sound  advice.  It  bids  him,  under  the  circum- 
stances, to  ouocrve  the  eighth  com.mandment  in  preference  to  this 
new  commandment  of  men — this  eleventh  commandment :  "Thou 
shalt  not  take  Alcohol."  But  the  very  fact  of  such  a  question 
being  put  at  all  shows  how  this  craze  is  warping  men's  judg- 
ment, and  I  fear  most  prohibitionists,  when  it  comes  to  a  pinch 
at  election  times,  won't  heed  the  "  direction  "  of  the  Globe. 


42 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


Again  we  quote  Hon.  Edward  Blake,  {Globe,  loth  January); 
"  I  find  many  supporters  of  temperance  legislation  who  do  not  look 
upon  drinking,  even  in  Scott  Act  counties,  as  a  crime,  and  who 
refuse  that  moral  support  and  help  to  the  enforcement  of  that 
law  which  they  give  to  the  general  criminal  law.  Just  compare 
things.  Suppose  one  of  us  is  walking  along  the  street  behind  a 
neighbor,  a  friend  or  stranger,  and  seeing  his  pocket  being  picked. 
He  would  make  himself  a  special  police  constable  at  once,  would 
try  to  prevent  the  crime,  and  if  he  was  big  enough  would  arrest 
the  criminal.  But  supposing  in  a  Scott  Act  county,  we  pass  an 
unlicensed  house,  for  they  are  all  unlicensed,  no  licenses  being 
granted — and  seeing  some  one  going  in  and  getting  drink ;  we  turn 
to  the  other  side ;  we  say  nothing  about  it ;  we  do  not  propose  to 
enforce  the  law." 

Brave,  honest  words !  "  We  do  not  propose  to  enforce  the 
law."  and  why.'  Because  we  feel  in  our  hearts  that  the  man  is 
not  committing  a  "crime,"  and  that  the  law  is  a  wicked  tyrannical 
one.  There  is  that  in  all  of  us,  more  or  less,  which  makes  us 
endorse  the  sentiment  of  Junius,  "  The  subject  who  is  truly  loyal 
to  the  chief  magistrate  will  neither  advise  nor  submit  to  arbitrary 
measures."  But  still  I  fear  Mr.  Blake's  charity  has  outrun  his 
judgment  in  this  instance.  He  generously  imagines  that  all  in  his 
audience  are  like  himself,  and  that  no  one  would  be  so  base- 
minded  as  to  turn  informer.  But  we  must  not  forget  that  the 
seeds  of  evil  are  in  all  humanity  and  only  require  proper  soil  and 
culture  to  make  them  increase  and  multiply.  Once  inaugurate  a 
system  of  rewarding  spies  and  informers  and  blackmailers,  and 
we  shall  soon  find  the  breed  increasing.  Under  tyrannical  and 
arbitrary  law  s  such  characters  always  abound ;  and  what  Juvenal 
has  shown  in  his  Satires  to  have  been  prevalent  in  Rome  in  her 
worst  days  of  Imperialism  will  soon  be  found  amidst  ourselves. 
Only  make  the  surroundings  favorable  by  means  of  rewards  and 
bribes,  and  soon  the  body  politic  will  be  swarming  with  such 
parasites.  And  especially  when  charges  of  this  nature  can  be 
so  easily  trumped  up.  On  one  occasion — I  do  not  record  this  as 
an  exceptional  instance,  for  who  is  there  that  has  not  heard  similar 
remarks.' — a  total  abstaining  friend  of  mine  was  relating  an 
altercation  he  had  with  another  teetotaller,  and  he  said  "  I  assure 
you  he  was  so  excited  that  if  I  had  not  known  him  to  be  a 
total  abstainer  I  should  have  said  he  .vas  drunk."     So  the  total 


PROHIBITION  ARGUMENTS, 


43 


abstinence  principles  of  his  opponent  alone  saved  my  friend  from 
breaking  the  ninth  commandment ;  and  we  may  rely  upon  it  that  in 
the  golden  days  of  prohibitio:i  which  we  are  promised,  since  there 
are  so  many  other  "stimulants"  to  the  mind  than  alcohol,  (pride, 
anger,  jealousy,  good  news,  sudden  joy,  revival  meetings,  etc.),  the 
spies  and  informers  will  have  many  a  chance,  when  they  have  seen 
a  man  "excited,"  to  say  he  was  drunk.  But  then  of  what  conse- 
quence is  the  ninth  commandment  compared  with  the  eleventh  } 

But,  happily  for  us,  we  have  not  as  yet  reached  this  stage  :  still 
for  the  present  the  manly  words  of  Mr.  Blake  are  true  of  the  vast 
majority,  and  reflect  the  public  sentiment  on  the  matter.  There 
is  a  great  conflict  waging  between  the  Dominion  and  Provincial 
Governments  as  to  which  of  them  should  undertake  "  to  enforce 
the  law."  Each  shifts  the  responsibility  on  the  other.  Small 
blame  to  either.  Neither  of  them  wants  the  dirty  job;  neither 
of  them  wants  lo  play  the  part  of  "  Ham,  the  faiher  of  Canaan." 

By  making  a  crime  of  that  which  is  no  crime,  society  is  put 
upon  a  false  basis.  It  is  no  statesmanlike  or  logical  plea  that 
thereby  some  harm,  at  any  rate,  will  be  prevented.  Such  a  plea 
would  justify  the  re -introduction  of  the  curfew  bell,  the  passport 
system,  the  censorship  of  the  press  and  every  other  arbitrary 
measure  from  which  we  have  freed  ourselves.  The  very  faci  that 
prohibition  needs  so  many  measures  which  would  never  be  toler- 
ated by  a  liberty-loving  people  regarding  any  other  infraction  of 
the  law; — the  testifying  of  a  wife  against  her  husband; — the 
allowing  and  even  compelling  a  man  to  incriminate  himself; — the 
believing  a  man  guilty  until  he  has  proved  his  innocence ; — the 
subversion  of  every  safeguard  of  British  law  and  justice; — prove 
how  demoralizing,  how  degrading,  how  enslaving  the  whole  pro- 
hibition movement  is; — and  it  will  end — as  all  such  tyrannical 
and  enslaving  legislation  has  done  in  all  countries  and  in  all  the 
centuries  of  history — in  making  us  a  nation  of  "  sneaks." 


ill 


44 


PAPEKS  ON  PROHIBiriON. 


No.  X. 


prohibitionists'  exaggerations. 


The  main  argument  of  the  prohibitionists,  and  where,  indeed, 
they  show  their  strength  is — not  when  they  talk  of  Scripture  or 
science,  for  they  make  a  sorry  mess  of  both,  but — when  they  dilate 
upon  the  horrors  of  drunkenness.  Here,  indeed,  they  have  most 
])ositive  and  powerful  grounds  ;  and,  //  they  would  only  draw  legit- 
imate conclusions  therefrom^  they  would  carry  the  world  with  them. 
But  when  they  draw  false  conclusions,  and  when  they  overstate 
the  facts  in  the  premises  themselves,  they  may  be  sure  that  some 
day,  and  that  before  long,  a  tremendous  recoil  will  come.  Their 
facts  and  statements  will  not  get  even  the  credit  they  deserve. 
Whenever  people  find  themselves  duped  to  the  slightest  extent 
they  learn  to  distrust  their  deceivers  in  the  slightest  matter  :  and 
so  the  last  state  becomes  worse  than  the  first.  But  prohibitionists 
have  so  shamefully  exaggerated  the  evils  of  even  the  "  habitual 
use  of  an  excessive  amount  of  alcohol "  that  just  as  soon  as  the 
public  learn  this,  and  learn  it  they  will,  then  the  main  prop,  not 
only  of  prohibition,  but  even  of  true  temperance  will  be  under- 
mined. In  illustration  of  this  let  us  take  some  of  the  positions  of 
prohibitionists  on  the  "evils  of  drink  :" 

I.  "  Drink  fills  our  jails,  our  penitentiaries  and  our  lunatic 
asylums." 

We  answer  : 

I  St.  Drink  does  indeed  fill  our  jails  ;  for  I  readily  grant  that  a 
very  large  proportion  indeed  of  those  who  are  Q.Qva.xm\.X.t^  for  short 
periods  are  classed  among  the  "  drunk  and  disorderly." 

2d.  Drink  does  not  *'  fill "  our  penitentiaries.  The  worst 
crimes  are  those  which  require  a  cool  head.  The  burglar,  the 
forger,  the  poisoner,  the  assassin,  does  not  get  drunk  to  carry  out 
his  crime.  The  reports  of  the  wardens  of  penitentiaries  in  the 
United  States  and  Canada  entirely  dissipate  this  idea. 

3d.  Drink  does  not  "  fill  "  our  lunatic  asylums.  In  the  reports 
from  the  Canadian  asylums  for  the  years  1881,  1882  and  1883  we 


PROHIBITIONISTS'  EX  AGGER  A  TIONS. 


45 


find  the  total  number  of  cases  attributed  to  intemperance  were  52, 
while  56  were  attributed  to  "  religious  excitement."  Shall  we 
therefore  say  that  religious  excitement  "  fills  "  our  lunatic  asylums  ? 
and  shall  we  therefore  prohibit  all  religion  ?  And  even  of  the  52 
we  should  take  into  account,  as  Mr.  Sutton  Sharpe  says,  that  very 
often  it  is  the  diminished  self-control  of  incipient  insanity  which 
leads  to  drink  and  not  drink  which  leads  tn  insanity.  In  regard  to 
these  assertions  of  the  prohibitionists,  I  would  urge  my  readers  to 
study  Mr.  Thomann's  work,  "  The  real  and  imaginary  Effects  of 
Intemperance,"  in  which  are  given,  not  wild  and  baseless  asser- 
tions, but  solid  statistics,  and  proved  facts  from  hundreds  of 
cases. 

II.  "  Drunkenness  has  caused  the  misery  and  ruin  of  many 
homes." 

Yes,  indeed  it  has,  God  knows.  But  even  here  some  discount 
must  be  made  ;  for  too  often  domestic  misery  and  ruin,  as  many 
can  tell,  have  been  the  cause  of  the  drunkenness. 

III.  "  Drunkenness  causes  suicide." 

But  statistics  have  clearly  proved  that  suicide  is  most  prev- 
alent in  countries  noted  for  temperance.  And  our  reasoning 
faculties  can  easily  discern  why.  Many  a  man,  driven  to  extrem- 
ities, either  through  misfortune  or  crime,  "takes  refuge  in  c'rink" 
amongst  ourselves,  while  in  other  countries  he  takes  refi  ge  in 
death.     Which  of  the  two  is  the  better  I  do  not  care  to  enquire. 

I  merely  dispute  the  statement  that  drink  is  the  cause  of  suicide. 
It  is  much  oftener  its  substitute. 

IV.  "  Drink  leads  to  crime." 

This  statement,  so  often  made,  is  a  grievous  exaggeration, 
most  mischievous  and  misleading.  Indeed  prohibition  orators 
themselves  confute  it  by  their  other  arguments.  Not  long  ago  the 
great  Daniel  Webster  was  spoken  of  on  a  Toronto  platform  as  an 
awful  example  of  drunkenness.  Would  the  orator  like  to  say  of 
him  that  drink  led  to  crime  ?  Did  drink  lead  to  crime  in  the 
cases  of  Lords  Brougham,  Eldon,  Thurlow,  Mansfield,  and  hun- 
dreds of  other  great  men  in  the  days  when  excess  'n  drinking 
was  the  fashion  ?  Have  we  not  all  recollections  of  old  men  who 
made  their  mark  and  whose  loss  the  world  deplored,  whose  drink- 
ing habits  would  now-a-days  be  very  reprehensible  :  and  would 
we  like  to  say  of  them  that  drink  led  to  crime  }     It  is  a  libel  on 


4(> 


FAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


our  ancestors.  The  fact  is,  too  often  in  these  days  crime  leads  to 
drink.  Many  a  man,  whose  fraudulent  transactions  or  wicked 
schemes  have  been  exposed,  has  become  reckless  and  taken  to 
drink  to  drown  his  conscience.  Such  a  one  should  have  been 
put  in  the  penitentiary  before  he  began  to  drink. 

If  all  these  terrible  results  are  due  solely,  or  even  largely  to 
drink,  what  a  glorious  record  of  health,  progress  and  prosperity 
are  we  entitled  to  look  for  from  that  champion  prohibition  State, 
Maine,  where  prohibitory  laws  have  been  in  operation  for  nearly 
forty  years — and  what  does  Maine,  whom  we  are  all  striving  to 
copy,  the  prohibition  pocket-borough  of  Gen.  N.  Dow,  show  us 
after  all  these  years  for  our  emulation  ? 

An  almost  stationary  population — an  actual  decrease  of  the 
native  population — a  decrease  of  the  birth-rate — a  fearful  increase, 
especially  in  consumption  and  miasmatic  diseases,  of  the  death- 
rate— a  sad  decrease  of  shipping  and  manufacturing  industries — 
a  most  burdensome  increase  of  taxation — and  a  fearful  showing 
as  compared  with  Canada,  in  divorce,  illiteracy,  pauperism,  in- 
sanity and  crime.  Had  we  not  better  wait  until  at  least  one 
country  in  the  world,  one  State,  one  tribe — whether  in  the  present 
or  in  the  past  (for  prohibition  is  no  new  thing),  can  show  us 
unmistakably  its  vast  advantages  ? 

It  is  amusing  to  see  how  Gen.  N.  Dow  tries  to  account  for  the 
fearful  increase  (nearly  200  per  cent.,  while  the  population  has 
only  increased  14)  of  crime  in  Maine.  In  a  letter  to  the  Witness 
towards  the  close  of  the  year  1884,  his  *'  explanation  "  amounted 
to  about  this  : 

"  Prohibition  does  prohibit.  But  1  admit  crime  in  Maine  hp? 
greatly  increased.  But  the  sole  cause  of  this  increased  crime  is 
drink.  But  drink  is  decreasing  in  Maine  because  prohibition 
does  prohibit.  But  crime  has  increased,  and  crime  is  due  to 
drink.     But  drink  is  diminishing,"  etc.,  etc. 

This  might  be  called  a  "circulating"  argument.  It  is  too 
illogical  to  be  even  called  arguing  in  a  circle.  One  might  as 
well  try  to  get  to  the  end  of  a  circulating  decimal. 

V.  Another  most  outrageous  exaggeration  is  about  the  number 
of  deaths  caused  by  drink.  How  many  are  estimated  by  prohibi- 
tionists it  would  be  hard  to  say  :  they  range  from  6,000  to  10,000 
for  the  Dominion  :  that  would  be  about  3,000  (say)  for  Ontario 


PROHIBITIONISTS'  EX  AGGER  A  TIONS, 


47 


Now  let  us  look  at  this  matter,  not  rhapsodically  but  coolly.  We 
again  take  the  War  Notes  statement  for  our  guide  ;  it  says  "the 
committee  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  mortality  amongst 
intemperate  persons  showed  a  four-fold  increase  in  deaths  from 
diseases  of  the  chylopoietic  viscera  (liver,  etc.,)  a  two-fold  in- 
crease in  deaths  from  renal  (kidney)  disease — an  increase  under 
pneumonia  and  pleurisy,"  etc.,  etc.  Now  this  is  not  a  very  satis- 
factory statement  ;  for  what  is  meant  by  "  a  four-fold  and  two-fold 
increase?"  Increase  as  compaicd  with  what?  Then  again,  "«« 
increase  in  pneumonia,  etc,"  This  last  is  too  vague  altogether. 
However,  not  to  be  captious,  and  to  make  up  for  this  "  an  in- 
crease "  we  will  put  every  single  case  of  death  from  liver  or  kidney 
diseases  to  the  debit  of  alcohol.  I  hope  my  readers,  who  may 
be  troubled  with  complaints  in  either  of  these  quarters  will  not 
sue  me  for  libel  if  I  class  them  among  the  "  intemperate  ?"  let 
them  bear  in  mind  I  only  do  so  hypothetically  to  give  prohibi- 
tionists the  benefit  of  every  doubt.  Then,  taking  the  report  of 
the  registrar  of  Ontario  for  1884,  we  have  Alcohol  debtor  : 


Lo  de 

;atns  trc 

)m  alcoholism,  -         -         -         -         - 
cirrhosis,           .        -         -        . 

34 
41 

gastritis  (inflammation  of  stomach), 
hepatitis  (inflammation  of  liver),  - 
ulcer  of  stomach,      -         .         - 

138 
205 

37 

diabetes, 

70 

nephria  (Bright's  disease), 

121 

T  Arv 

Total, 


815 


Again  I  beg  pardon  of  those  who  are  suffering  from  some  of 
these  diseases  named.  And  for  their  comfort  let  me  add  that 
eminent  physiologists,  such  as  Dr.  Flint  (professor  in  Bellevue 
Hospital  College,  N.  Y.,  in  his  work  on  "  The  Practice  of  Medi- 
cine "),  Dr.  Anstie,  and  others  repudiate  the  idea  of  alcohol 
being  an  important  cause  in  kidney  and  liver  diseases — and  the 
1,000  brewers  of  New  York  show  a  remarkable  freedom  from 
them.  The  only  danger  {and  that  is  indeed  very  great)  is  from 
strong  spirits  taken  undiluted. 

Now  for  the  credit  side.  ist.  Dr.  Farr,  the  Registrar-General 
of  England,  quoted  by  our  own  Provincial  Board  of  Health  as 


48 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


the  highest  authority  on  medical  statistics,  thus  writes  of  zymotic 
diseases  : — "  I  invite  the  attention  of  those  who  have  portrayed 
the  bad  effects  of  alcohol  to  consider  whether  it  does  not  prevent 
the  actions  of  various  infections  in  the  atmosphere.  The  neglect 
of  this  side  of  the  question  throws  a  doubt  on  many  of  their  in- 
ferences. The  deaths  attributed  to  zymotic  diseases  (he  is  speak- 
ing of  England)  in  1876  were  96,660 — to  alcoholism,  1,120.  Now 
it  is  evident  that  any  effect  depressing  the  prevalence  of  zymotic 
diseases  that  kill  their  tens  of  thousands  loill  save  the  lives  of 
thousands." 

Bearing  this  in  mind  let  us  now  sum  up  the  list  in  which 
alcohol  is  creditor  : 


«( 


No.  of  deaths  from  zymotic  (miasmatic)  diseases,  3,762 

phthysis  (consumption),        -  2,347 

heart  disease,  -        -         -  958 

bronchitis,     -        -        -        -  426 


M 


« 


7»493 
So,  then,  it  seems  that  the  diseases  where  alcohol  might  have 
caused  death  carried  off  their  hundreds,  while  diseases  where 
alcohol  might  have  saved  life  carried  off  their  thousands. 

With  all  these  statistics  officially  furnished  by  the  Govern- 
ment, what  is  the  use  of  all  this  preposterous  exaggeration  ? 

We  close  this  paper  with  the  following  extract  from  the 
Week  : 

"  The  Revue  Scientifique  publishes  a  paper  on  alcohol  and 
alcoholism,  which  presents  statistics  and  conclusions  of  a  startling 
nature.  The  author,  M.  Fournier  de  Flaix,  affirms  that  the  out- 
cry against  alcohol  is  utterly  unmerited,  as  it  does  far  more  good 
than  harm.  To  demonstrate  this,  M.  de  Flaix  furnishes  tabular 
statements  to  show  that  not  only  in  the  French  departments,  but 
in  all  other  countries  the  birth-rate  is  lower  and  the  death-rate 
higher  wherever  the  consumption  of  alcohol  is  small.  It  is 
further  argued  from  these  figures  that  neither  criminality  nor 
suicide  is  in  proportion  to  alcoholic  consumption.  In  the  Seine 
et  Oise  the  consumption  of  alcohol  is  just  about  half  what  it  is 
in  the  Seine  Inferieure,  yet  the  suicide  rate  is  double  in  the 
former.  In  England,  again,  more  alcohol  is  consumed  than  in 
France,  and  yet  in  France,  the  writer  points  out,  the  birth-rate, 


PROIIIBITIO.VISTS'  EXAGGERA  TIONS. 


49 


the  death-rate,  the  statistics  of  crime  and  suicide,  are  less  favor- 
able than  in  England.  The  comparisons  for  Italy,  Spain,  Sweden, 
Norway,  Denmark,  Russia,  Austria  and  Germany  show  analagous 
results.  M.  de  Flaix's  conclusion  is  that  it  is  the  nations  with 
the  most  vital  powers,  the  greatest  wealth,  and  the  besf  morals 
who  consume  the  most  alcohol." 

So  we  see  the  Holy  Scriptures  did  not  make  a  mistake  in 
allowing,  not  to  say  inculcating,  the  consumption  of  alcohol. 


!l! 


No.  XL 


DOES  PROHIBITION  FROniDIT  ?      SUBSTITUTES  FOH  ALCOHOL — OPIUM,  4C. 


Does  prohibition  prohibit?  Some  vehemently  answer,  Yes; 
others  as  emphatically  say.  No.  I  think  we  may  decide  that  both 
answers  are  correct.  It  does  prohibit,  and  it  d  es  not.  It  does 
prohibit  the  open  and  above  board  sale  f  reliable  alcoholic  bev- 
erages by  those  who  are  responsible  to  ihe  public ;  but  it  does  not 
prohibit  the  surreptitious  sale  of  villainous  spirits  by  irresponsi- 
ble parties.  It  prohibits  worthy  people  from  making  a  good  use 
of  alcohol ;  but  it  does  not  prohibit  unscrupulous  people  from 
making  a  bad  use  of  it.  Dr.  Moxon,  in  the  "  Symposium  "  in  the 
Conteviporary,  says  : 

"I  believe  that,  to  a  large  extent,  teetotalism  lays  firmest  hold 
on  those  who  are  least  likely  ever  to  become  drunkards,  and  are 
most  likely  to  want  at  times  the  medical  use  of  alcohol ;  sensitive, 
good-natured  people  of  weak  constitution.  Drunkenness  prevails 
in  spite  of  teetotalism,  whilst  the  pledge  inflicts  useless  self-torture. 
Let  the  Legislature  put  the  sot  under  control." 

How  those,  of  delicate  constitution,  who  ought  to  take  alcohol 
are  prohibited,  I  have  already  indicated  on  page  31.  How 
those  who  ought  «<?/  to  take  it  can  nevertheless  obtain  it.  Gen.  N. 
Dow  confesses,  as  regards  Maine,  and  the  articles  in  the  Mail  ba.ve 
shown  as  regards  Scott  Act  counties  in  Canada.  Justices  Rose 
and  Cameron  have  of  late  declared  from  the  Bench  the  same 
thing. 

But  one  thing  is  certain ;  whatever  may  be  accomplished  in 
prohibiting  the  supply,  prohibition  cannot  prohibit  the  demand  iox 


% 


50 


PAPERS  OxV  PROHIBITION. 


cerebral  !;timulants  which  this  high-pressure  age,,  with  its  incessant 
mental  strain,  its  ambitions  and  rivalries,  its  ceaseless  brain  work, 
its  hurry  and  worry,  its  struggle  for  existence,  has  created.  As  a 
consequence,  we  find  that  ever  since  the  consumption  of  alcohol 
has  been  tabooed,  its  place  has  been  taken  by  substitutes  infinitely 
more  dangerous,  and  producing  in  truth  what  has  been  falsely 
charged  to  beer,  (see  page  37)  ''a  degeneration  of  most  of 
the  organism  profound  and  very  deceptive."  So  we  hear  of  vic- 
tims of  the  laudanum  habit,  the  morphine  habit,  the  cocaine  habit, 
the  chloral  habit,  the  quinine  habit,  the  arsenic  habit,  the  strych- 
nine habit,  increasing  in  numbers  steadily  A  New  York  paper 
says :  "  So  great  has  been  the  spread  of  the  opium  habit  in  New 
York  that  there  are  now  physicians  who  attend  to  nothing  else 
than  repairing  opium  wrecks.  The  vice  strikes  high  ...  In 
the  professions  are  scores  of  'Fiends.'  They  soon  become  hope- 
less wrecks.  Physxciauo  seem  to  be  especially  liable,  and  pastors 
are  the  next  most  numerous."  A  short  time  ago  the  Daily  Times 
contained  an  extract  from  the  N.  Y.  Sun  concerning  the  quinine 
habit,  showing  how  the  use  of  this  drug  is  growing  fast ;  it  closed 
thus :  "  A  good  proportion  of  the  custom  comes  from  women  who 
grow  fatigued  or  weary  while  shopping,  and  who,  instead  of  buy- 
ing nutritious  luncheon  or  drinking  a  wholesome  bottle  of  porter 
or  ale,  resort  to  the  insidious  quinine  pill." 

The  following  extracts  from  a  paper  read  lately  at  a  meeting 
of  the  Literary  Guild  of  St.  Peter's  Church,  by  Mr.  Allan  Turner 
illustrate  the  fearful  hold  -that  opium  in  its  various  forms  is  taking 
of  the  people  of  the  United  States  ever  since  prohibition  princi- 
ples have  spread. 

"  With  the  single  exception  of  alcohol  in  its  various  forms  and 
combinations,  opium  is  the  stimulant  and  intoxicant  most  exten- 
sively used  by  mankind  .  .  .  Bad  as  the  physiological  conse- 
quences of  excessive  abuse  of  alcohol  may  be,  (and  we  have  very 
lively  pictures  of  alcohol's  work  from  temperance  orators  and 
writers)  the  effects  bodily  and  mental  of  excess  in  opium,  hasheesh 
and  other  narcotic  stimulants,  far  surpass  those  resulting  from  al- 
cohol, in  horror,  misery  and  degradation.  Fortunately  the  num- 
ber of  opium  eaters  as  comj)ared  with  the  number  of  drunkards, 

is  few  on  this  continent  at  present But  .      .      .we 

must  take  into  consideration  that  the  habit  is  growing,  and  grow- 
ing  with   rapidity  too."    "In   its  proper  place,  as  a  medicine, 


DOES  PROHIBITIOiV  PROHIBIT? 


51 


opium  is  a  great  blessing  to  man,  .  .  .  and  is  appropriately 
called  The  Physician's  Sheet  Anchor."  In  small  doacs  it  is  stim- 
ulant, in  larger  doses  narcotic."  "  The  habitual  user  of  the  drug 
soon  becomes  a  mental,  moral  and  physical  wreck."  "  It  holds  its 
slave  in  a  grasp  fiom  whence  he  rarely  escapes."  "The  use  of 
morphine  by  the  hypodermic  syringe  is  perhaps  the  most  seductive 
form  of  this  habit  from  the  peculiarly  pleasant  effect  of  the  drug 
administered  in  this  way,  and  from  the  ease  and  secrecy  v,rith 
which  a  dose  may  be  taken  at  any  time."  "Another  form  is  .  . 
opium  smoking."  "The  habit  was  imported  by  the  Chinese,  but 
it  is  no  longer  confined  to  the  Celestials.  Opium  joints  are  fre- 
quented by  a  large  number  of  white  votaries  and  this  number  is 
constantly  and  rapidly  increasing."  "  Morphine  and  laudanum  are 
the  forms  in  which  opium  eaters  in  this  country  generally  use  the 
drug."  "The  imports  of  opium  prepared  for  smoking  into  Mie 
United  States  in  1870  were  12,603  pounds,  in  1883  they  had  in- 
creased to  298,153  pounds." 

■'The  imports  of  ordinary  opium  into  the  United  States  have 
risen  from  135,305  pounds  in  1867,  to  385,060  pounds  in  1881, 
an  increase  much  greater  than  the  proportional  increase  in  the 
population." 

"  These  are  statistics  which  deserve  the  careful  attention  of 
every  thoughtful  individual.  We  see  and  hear  much  of  temper- 
ance societies  and  other  organizations  for  preventing  the  abuse  of 
alcoholic  drinks  (indeed  generally  for  preventing  the  use  of  them) 
and  for  the  reclamation  of  drunkards.  Here  is  an  evil  growing 
up  with  almost  no  effort  made  to  check  it.  Societies  for  reclaim- 
ing opium  smokers  would  be  useless  or  almost  so.  Men  may,  and 
frequently  do,  use  alcoholic  stimulants  with  moderation  throughout 
a  long  life  without  injury,  or  r^  least  with  very  little  injury  to 
body  or  mind;  but  there  is  no  case  on  record  of  a  moderate 
habitual  user  of  opium."  -;,;;,  ^ 

The  great  danger  of  this  substitute  for  alcohol,  as  Mr.  Turner 
has  pointed  out,  is  "the  ease  and  secresy  with  which  it  is  admin- 
istered." Formerly,  in  ante-prohibition  days,  the  individual  seeking 
a  stmiulant  would  go  to  the  saloon  in  sight  of  all  men,  and  take 
his  alcoholic  beverage — perhaps  too  much,  perhaps  just  enough 
for  his  brain  work.  But  now — though  the  demands  on  his  mental 
faculties  are  as  great  as  ever,  and  though  he  may  Teel  unequal  to 
his  task — he  knows  that  to  take  a  glass  of  wine  or  beer  would  be 


ill 


f 


53 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


shocking.  So  he  carries  his  little  hypodermic  syringe,  that  tells 
no  tales,  and  stimulates  himself  in  this  way.  Frirhtful  dories  are 
told  of  the  business  men  in  the  Stock  Exchange  and  elsewhere 
in  New  York.  Fagged  out  it  may  be  with  previous  brain  work, 
still  they  are  conscious  that  a  fortune,  perhaps,  depends  upon  the 
mental  excitation  of  the  moment.  To  take  a  glass  of  wine  would 
never  do,  it  might  lead  to  social  or  ecclesiastical  excommunica- 
tion, so  they  quietly  inject  the  morph.'ne.  It  renders  them  brisk 
for  the  time,  and  they  are  able  to  transa-t  their  business  or  make 
their  speculations  with  no  one  the  wiser,  as  they  suppose.  But 
alas  !  that  little  injection  is  infinitely  worse  then  all  the  beer  con- 
sumed by  any  laborer  in  the  breweries  of  the  city. 

And  doubtless,  if  the  whole  truth  were  known,  the  speculators 
and  physicians  and  pastors  are  not  the  only  transgressors  in  this 
respect.  I  should  not  be  at  all  surprised  if  some  day  it  should 
be  revealed  that  some  eminent  prohibition  orator  and  ''  reformed 
drunkard  "  (for  it  seems  the  brightest  lights  of  the  prohibition 
platform,  from  John  B.  Gough  to  Sam  Jones  an«l  Sam  Small 
were,  and  boast  of  having  been,  in  earlier  life,  disgusting  sots) 
nerved  himself  to  the  task  of  dilating  upon  the  horrors  of  the 
"  accursed  traffic  "  by  swallowing  a  pill  or  two,  or  by  giving  himself 
a  stealthy  prod  with  his  little  syringe.  And  so  in  striving  to  cast 
out  the  unclean  spirit  of  drunkenness  by  such  unrighteous  means, 
men  are  letting  in  seven  devils  more  wicked  than  itself,  which 
are  entering  into  the  body  social  and  alas !  dwelling  there. 


No.  XII. 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BHAIN  INVXQOnATOR. 


We  have  yet  to  consider  another  most  important  part  which 
alcohol  plays,  and  has  played  since  the  days  of  Noah,  for  the 
benefit  of  mankind.  We  shall  pass  by  that  which  is  nevertheless 
a  very  valuable  function,  viz.  :  its  exhilarating  properties,  its 
"making  glad  the  heart  of  man"  ( Psalm  civ.) — though  its  ad- 
vantages have  been  incalculable  in  that  respect — so  much  so  that 
poets  of  all  ages,  from  the  Rig  Vedas  to  Tennyson,  not  excepting 
the  Hebrew  poets  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  have  sung  its  praises  and 
thanked  God  for  his  good  gift,  and  it  has  ever  been  a  symbol  of 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BRAIN  IN  VIGOR  A  TOR. 


53 


hospitality,  a  cemcntcr  of  friendship,  a  pledge  of  good  will,  a  rec- 
onciler of  adversaries,  a  reducer  of  ill-temper.  We  will  waive  all 
this  we  say,  because  we  know  that  to  the  sour  ascetic  all  this 
counts  for  nothing.  But  we  do  insist  on  the  immense  value  of 
alcohol,  in  all  times  past  and  present,  as  a  brain  invicorator. 

Of  course  we  mean  properly  used.  Alcohol  is  not  different 
from  any  other  thing.  It  is  not  a  solitary  exception  to  all  natural 
laws.  Like  water,  like  fire,  like  steam,  like  electricity,  like  gun- 
powder, it  is  and  ever  has  been  "  a  good  servant  but  a  bad  mas- 
ter." We  have  already  seen  its  good  service  in  hygiene,  in 
warding  off  diseases  of  the  miasmatic  class,  and  in  prolonging 
life  in  others.  Again,  let  me  say,  properly  used  j  it  is  tiresome  to 
have  to  repeat  this  so  often,  but  when  temperance  agitators  so 
continuously  employ  that  absurdest  and  most  childish  and  frivol- 
ous of  all  arguments,  "  if  a  little  is  good  then  a  i^reat  deal  must  be 
better,"  an  argument  which  no  one  would  think  of  applying  to 
water,  fire,  oxygen,  steam,  or  any  earthly  thing  whatever,  one 
must  reiterate  that  alcohol,  like  everytliins;  else,  must  be  used  tem- 
perately, and  when  used  in  excess  is  like  every  other  thing — 
injurious. 

In  support  of  our  contention  we  quote  the  following  : 

I.  Sir  James  Paget,  M.  D.,  the  first  of  the  writers  in  the 
Contemporary  "Symposium."  "But  as  to  he  working  power, 
whether  bodily  or  mental,  there  can  be  no  juestion  th..L  ihe  ad- 
vantage is  on  the  side  of  those  who  U'      Icoholic  drinks.     And  it 

is  advantage  of  this  kind  which  is  mobi  i'    be  desired 

That  which  is  most  to  be  desi:  1  is  a  national  j.owe'  'or  good  work- 
ing and  good  thinking  and  a  long  duration  of  tlic  p-^riod  of  liie 
fittest  for  those  ;  and  facts  show  that  these  are  more  nearly 
attained  by  the  peoples  that  drink  alcohol  than  by  those  who  do 
.     .     .     .     "  I  would  maintain  this  and  all  that  ca?^  be 


not."  .... 
reasonably  deducted  from  it,  namely,  that  the  best  and  in  pr  por- 
tion to  numbers  the  largest  quantity  of  brain  work  has  been 
and  still  is  being  done  by  the  people  of  those  nations  in  which 
the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks  has  been  and  is  habitual.  Furtl-  r  ' 
would  maintain,  so  far  as  I  can  judge  of  the  brain  work  of  dii.ci- 
ent  persons,  they  have  done  the  best  and  most  who  have  habit- 
ually and  temperately  taken  alcoholic  drinks."  _ 

2.  J.  P.  Lewis,  M.  D.,  of  University  of  Brussels  L.  R.  C.  P., 
Edin.     M.  R.  C.  S.,  England  :  "  I  prescribe  total  abstinence  as  an 


54 


PAPERS  ON  PROlIlBITIOiY. 


1 


'y-x 


extreme  remedy  for  a  desperate  disease  ;  but  they  that  are  whole 
need  not  the  physician — nor  the  remedy." 

"  I  am  bound  to  give  exi)ression  to  my  opinion  that  teetotal- 
ism  would  be  highly  injurious  to  this  great  nation  (Great  Britain) 
or  any  other  nation  careful  of  its  place  in  the  van  of  civilization^ 

3.  Dr.  Evarts,  of  the  Cincinnati  Sanitarium^  in  his  "What 
Shall  we  do  for  the  Drunkard  ? "  (which  has  been  quoted  before) 
says  :  "  Is  it  not  indeed  probable  that  were  all  brain  stimulants, 
other  than  ordinary  fooas  common  to  man  and  other  animals,  at 
once  and  forever  annihila^^.d,  or  the  alcoholic  \'arieties  alone 
withheld  forever  from  common  use,  that  the  result  would  be  in  the 
course  of  time  deleterious  to  mankind,  by  reason  of  brain  deter- 
ioration resulting  from  a  loss  of  such  food,  and  a  consequent 
gradual  (no  matter  how  slow)  return  of  the  races  to  a  more 
common  level,  at  the  expense  of  those  who  have  accomplished 
the  greatest  upward  departure  therefrom?" 

4.  The  London  Times  article  of  14th  August,  18S4,  on  Alco- 
holic Drinks, 

5.  The  Popular  Science  Monthly  of  N.  Y.,  in  April,  1884. 

(I  have  not  space  to  quote  these,  but  they  strongly  endorse  the 
opinions  of  the  above). 

6.  Any  scientific  work  whatever  on  the  physiological  action  of 
alcohol,  such  as  even  the  Temperance  essay  of  Dr.  Miller,  ("Alco- 
hol, its  place  and  power,"  already  quoted)  will  tell  the  student 
that  alcohol  "  stimulates  the  imagination  while  it  enfeebles  the 
will  power."  Prohibition  writers  and  speakers  constantly  harp  on 
this  "  scientific  fact "  that  alcohol  "  enfeebles  the  will  power  ;" 
but  they  always  conveniently  forget  to  tell  us  about  its  stimulat- 
ing the  imagination.  Now  what  is  the  "  Imagination  ? "  Let 
prohibitionists  consult,  not  scientific  works,  that  may  be  out  of 
their  line,  but  say  Worcester's  or  Webster's  larger  dictionaries, 
They  will  find,  if  they  read  the  whole  article  carefully,  that  the 
imagination,  in  physiological  and  biological  language,  means  the 
inventive,  designing,  constructing,  creative  faculty,  that  which 
chiefiy  differentiates  man  from  the  lower  organisms,  in  contrast 
to  the  perceptive  or  receptive  faculties,  those  which  take  in  and 
store  up  the  thoughts  of  others  or  receive  impressions  from 
without. 

Such  are  the  conclusions  of  "  Science,"  notwithstan  'ng  Rev. 
J.   B.  Hamilton  and  his  lecture  ;  and  as  all  science  verifies  its 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BRAIN  INVIGORATOR. 


55 


hypothesis  by  experience,  so  all  experience  verifies  these  author- 
ities. Even  the  researches  of  late  made  into  prehistoric  times 
have  shown  that  the  first  people  (the  Aryans)  whom  we  can  trace 
emerging  from  barbarism  into  primeval  civilization  (see  Clodd's 
''  Childhood  of  Religions,"  chap,  vi,  sec.  </,  and  Prof.  Rawlinson's 
"  Origin  of  Nations,"  chap,  vi,)  who  learned  to  domesticate  animals, 
to  design  various  tools,  to  cultivate  poetry  and  art,  had  learnt 
also  to  manufacture  an  intoxicating  beverage,  known  as  the  Soma 
juice.  To  this  Soma  juice  they  sang  hymns  as  to  a  god,  and 
extolled  its  power  for  inspiring  the  mind  with  brilliant  ideas, 
lofty  thoughts,  and  grand  designs.  From  that  day  to  this,  that 
progressive  and  agressive  race  to  which  we  ourselves  belong, 
known  in  Scripture  language  as  the  "  Sons  of  Japheth,"  of  whom 
Noah  prophesied  when  he  "  awoke  from  his  wine  "  (Gen,  ix), 
"  God  shall  enlarge  Japheth  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of 
Shem  ;"  (a  prophecy  which  is  still  being  fulfilled) — that  race 
spoken  of  by  Horace  (Odes  i,  3)  as  "  Audax  Japeti  genus  "  and 
described  in  ethnological  science  in  turn  as  the  Indo-Germanic, 
the  Indo-European,  and  the  Great  Aryan  race,  have  ever  been 
going  on,  subduing  their  brethren  of  the  other  races,  ever  in  "  the 
van  of  civilization  "  with  increased  brain  power,  ami  braimocight, 
and  ever  large  consumers  of  alcohol.  There  is  a  universality 
about  this,  a  semper  iil'iqiie,  ab  omnibus,  which  we  cannot  afford  to 
ignore.  Take  the  greatest  drinking  nations,  as  the  Germans  or 
the  Anglo-Saxons,  and  you  find  them  the  best  soldiers,  the 
greatest  adventurers,  the  ripest  scholars,  the  profoundest  thinkers, 
the  chief  inventors  and  discoverers.  And  contrast  with  them  the 
Turks,  the  Hindoos,  the  Egyptians,  the  Arabs,  the  Chinese,  or  any 
other  nation  whatever  that  have  made  total  abstinence  from 
alcohol  a  part  of  the  "  whole  duty  of  man  ; "  what  do  they 
contribute  to  the  world  of  thought  or  to  the  advance  of  humanity  ? 
Now  this  question  of  prohibition  is  one  which  should  be 
decided  for  a  nation,  not  by  what  Mr.  Joseph  Cook  in  one  of  his 
"  Monday  Lectures  "  calls  "count  of  heads  and  clack  of  tongues," 
but  after  thorough,  calm,  unprejudiced,  scientific  investigation. 
Science — real  science — judges  not  by  isolated  cases  but  by  grand 
generalizations  ;  she  does  not  say  "  Here  is  a  man  who  has  lost 
his  mind,  or  there  is  another  who  has  lost  his  health,  or  there  is 
another  who  has  ruined  his  family  through  an  '  habitual  use  of  an 
excessive  quantity  of  alcohol ; '  therefore  let  us  prohibit  its  use. 


f 


56 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


its  sale,  its  manufacture  altogether."  No  ;  science  will  ask : 
What  has  been  the  general  effect  among  the  vast  masses,  through- 
out all  experience  and  all  history,  of  the  ordinary  consumption  of 
alcohol?  The  London  Spectator  (24th  September,  1884,  article 
"  Morality  of  Diet ")  says  :  "As  a  drunken  man  does  immoral 
acts,  it  is  natural  that  a  practice,  which,  if  carried  to  an  excess, 
makes  men  drunk,  should  be  held  in  se  unholy,  and  total  absti- 
nence be  raised  by  the  exaggeration  characteristic  of  recoil  into 

a  moral  obligation Wine  is  not  wicked  in  se,  and  t/ie 

theories  they  raise  on  that  basis  are  fallacies  contradicted  by  a  glance 
at  the  facts  of  the  world.  So  far  from  the  use  of  alcohol  destroy- 
ing the  races  that  use  it,  the  "wine-bibbing  "  races  are  the  con- 
quering races,  and  civilization  owes  everything,  not  to  the  Hindoo, 
who  abstains  like  Sir  W.  Lawson,  or  to  the  Mussulman,  who 
abstains  like  a  convict  in  prison,  but  to  the  wine-tasting  Greek, 
and  the  hard-drinking  Roman  and  the  beer-swilling  Teuton.  The 
Hebrew,  who  drinks  and  always  has  drunk  from  Noah  downwards, 
has  done  five  times  as  much  for  the  world  as  his  cousin  the  Arab, 
who  even  in  Africa  is  the  most  rigid  abstainer.  The  single 
Hindoo  sect  which  has  not  renounced  alcohol,  but  demands 
regular  rations  of  rum — the  Sikh — is  the  one  which,  were  we  awa,/ 
from  India,  would  conquer  and  probably  reinvigorate  all  the 
others.  Nor  is  the  teetotaler's  dogma  as  to  the  moral  effects  of 
total  abstinence,  especially  in  regard  to  violent  crime,  one  whit 
more  irrefutable.  The  Turks  who  committed  the  atrocities  of 
Batouk  were  hereditary  total  abstainers  ;  the  authors  of  the 
massacre  of  Cawnpore  had  never  seen  liquor  ;  and  the  Bedouin, 
who  will  kill  you  for  your  buttons,  wouM  kill  you  also,,  if  he 
could,  for  drinking  beer.  " 

Here,  then,  are  certain  facts  which  the  believer  in  Christ  must 
face.  There  are  three  religions  which  for  centuries  have  held 
sway  over  the  minds  of  innumerable  millions  of  mankind — the 
Buddhist,  the  Mohamedan.  the  Christian,  (under  this  last  we  in- 
clude its  precursor.  Judaism — we  mean,  in  fact,  the  religion  of 
the  Bible  from  the  time  of  Moses.)  Of  these  three  religions  the 
two  first  named  were  strictly  prohibitionist.  Mohammed  stigma- 
tized alcohol  as  "  the  mother  of  sins  "  (like  our  prohibitionists,) 
and  as  is  well  known  all  his  followers  are  bound  to  abstain.  The 
five  prohibitory  commandments  of  Buddha  are  as  follows  : 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BRAIN  INVIGORATOR. 


57 


!     i 


I.  Thou  shalt  abstain  from  destroying  or  causing  the  destruc- 
tion of  any  living  thing. 

II.  Thou  shalt  abstain  from  acquiring  or  keeping  by  fraud  or 
violence  the  property  of  another. 

III.  Thou  shp.lt  abstain  from  those  who  are  not  proper  objects 
of  thy  lust. 

IV.  Thou  shalt  abstain  from  deceiving  others  either  by  word 
or  deed. 

V.  Thou  shalt  abstain  from  intoxicating  drinks  and  drugs. 
These   are   thus   rendered   in   that   charming   poem,    Edwin 

Arnold's  "  Light  of  Asia  "  (towards  the  close) : 

Kill  not — for  pity's  sake — and  lest  ye  slay 
The  meanest  thing  upon  its  upward  way. 

Give  freely  and  receive  ;  but  take  from  none 
By  greed,  or  force,  or  fraud,  what  is  his  own. 

Bear  not  false  witness,  slander  net  nor  lie  ; 
Truth  is  the  speech  of  inward  purity. 

Shun  drugs  and  drinks  which  work  the  wit  abuse ; 
Clear  minds,  clean  bodies  need  no  Soma  juice. 

Touch  not  thy  neighbor's  wife,  neither  commit 
Sins  of  the  flesh  unlawful  and  unfit. 

Now,  will  any  one  in  his  sober  senses  pretend  to  say  that  these 
are  an  improvement  on  the  prohibitions  of  the  Decalogue  of 
Mount  Sinai  ?  At  present  there  is  a  craze  among  the  "  cultured  " 
of  Boston  and  New  York  to  introduce  '  Buddhism  "  as  a  substi- 
tute for  what  they  deem  an  "  effete  "  Christianity.  I  wonder  how, 
in  the  face  of  the  researches  of  Pasteur  and  other  physiologists 
concerning  the  immanence  of  organic  life  everywhere,  these 
"  Buddhists  '  are  going  to  keep  their  First  Commandment.  Is  it 
sin  to  "destroy  or  cause  the  destruction  of"  the  Bacilli  and 
Bacteria  of  the  various  Zymotic  diseases  ?  But  this  fad  must,  I 
suppose,  like  other  fads,  have  its  day. 

In  opposition  to  these  two  prohibitionist  religions,  Christianity, 
the  religion  of  the  Bible,  has  ever  tolerated  and  sanctioned,  nay 
authorized,  the  use  of  alcohol.  It  has  done  more  than  that — it 
has  sanctified  it ;  it  has  insisted  upon  it  as  an  integral  part  of  all 


'1 


J 


58 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


religious  worship.     It  has  provided  for  its  use  not  only  ritually, 
or  medicinally,  but  as  an  article  of  ordinary  diet. 

And  now  we  ask  you,  readers,  judging — not  from  exceptional 
and  extreme  cases,  but  as  true  science  always  judges — trom  gen- 
eralizations, from  the  consideration  of  the  "  greatest  good  of  the 
greatest  number  " — from  the  universal  experience  and  history  of 
the  whole  human  race — which  was  right — Mohammed,  Buddha, 
or  the  "  wine-bibber  " — Christ  ? 


No.  XIII. 


ALCOnOL  AS  A  BRAIN  INVIGORATOR,   CONTINUED. 


1.  We  said  in  our  last  paper  that  this  most  important  question 
of  the  consumption  of  alcohol  i.iust  be  judged  of,  not  by  isolated 
cases  where  excess  had  been  ^is  we  all  acknowledge)  prejudicial 
or  ruinous,  but  by  its  effects  in  the  aggregate,  by  generalizations. 
Sir  Wm.  Roberts,  M.  D.,  of  Manchester,  in  his  work  on  "  Food 
Accessories  "  (such  as  alcohol,  tea,  coffee,  etc.),  thus  writes: 

"  These  generalized  food  customs  of  mankind  are  not  to  be 
viewed  as  random  practices  adopted  to  please  the  palate  or  gratify 
our  idle  or  vicious  appetite.  These  customs  must  be  regarded  as 
the  outcome  of  profound  instincts  which  correspond  to  the  im- 
portant wants  of  the  human  economy.  They  are  the  fruit  of 
colossal  experience,  accumulated  by  countless  millions  of  men 
through  successive  generations.  They  have  th.e  same  weight  and 
significance  as  other  kindred  facts  of  natural  history,  and  are 
fitted  to  yield  to  observation,  and  to  study  lessons  of  the  highest 
scientific  and  practical  value." 

2.  In  stating  in  the  last  paper,  that  the  consumption  of  alco- 
hol had  always  been  the  concomitant  of  civilization  and  mental 
progress,  we  adduced  the  Aryan  races :  but  they  are  not  the  only 
instances.  Late  researches  in  the  history  of  the  ancient  Egyp- 
tians have  shown  that  they  were  not  only  wine  drinkers  (with  all 
due  deference  to  Miss  Wilmot  and  her  interesting  little  tract), 
but  also  manufacturers  and  consumers  of  beer.  Indeed  it  is 
quite  possible  that  in  the  excavations  that  are  now  going  on  in 


Ut 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BRAIN  INVICORATOR. 


59 


"  The  Field  of  Zoan  "  we  may  yet  come  across  a  barrel,  a  cask, 
or  jug  of  King  Pharaoh's  XX.     (  See  Blackwood,  August  1870.) 

Then  again  take  those  marvellous  people,  the  ancient  Peru- 
vians. Mr.  W.  H.  Prescott  {Conquest  of  Peru)  tells  us  that  their 
religion  was  a  Monotheism  of  a  very  high  type — their  conquests 
were  astonishing — their  progress  in  the  arts  and  sciences  and  in 
every  aspect  of  social  life  most  remarkable;  and  that  they  were 
also  "  hard  drinkers." 

3.  Here  let  me  enter  my  caveat  against  misuse  being  made  of 
the  physiological  fact  that  alcohol  "stimulates  the  imagination." 
There  are  young  people  whose  minds  are  by  nature  highly,  perhaps 
abnormally,  imaginative; — young  poets,  young  mathematicians, 
young  geniuses  of  all  kinds.  For  them  to  stimulate  an  already 
over-active  imagination  would  be  a  terrible  mistake ;  it  would  be 
to  court  the  untimely  fate  of  a  Byron,  a  Chatterton,  or  an  Edgar 
A.  Poe.  Again  let  me  warn  those  who  are  altogether  devoid  of 
imagination,  that  alcohol,  while  it  may  stimulate,  cannot  create  it. 
They  need  not  suppose  that  by  pouring  whiskey  down  their 
throats  they  can  become  "geniuses:"  they  will  only  become 
drivelling  idiots.  Steam  will  make  the  machine  go,  provided  the 
machine  is  in  good  working  order;  if  it  be  faulty  all  the  steam  in 
the  world  won't  make  it  go.  Even  if  the  machine  be  perfect,  an 
excess  of  steam  will  quickly  injure  it.  So  with  that  marvellously 
intricate  machine,  the  brain. 

Besides,  very  young  *'  geniuses  "  have  no  business  to  stimulate 
the  imagination ;  they  have  rather  to  dampen  it.  Their  first  duty 
is  to  become,  not  producers  but  consumers  of  thought.  In  re- 
ceiving and  assimilating  the  ideas  of  others  (which  is  the  first 
business  of  the  young  mind)  alcohol  is  not  only  unnecessary  but 
prejudicial :  when  a  man  is  thus  studying — taking  in  and  storing 
up  the  thoughts  of  others — when  his  mind  is  in  what  I  may  call  a 
receptive  condition,  he  does  not  want  alcohol.  But  on  the  other 
hand  when  he  h  paying  out — when  he  is  originating,  constructing, 
devising,  producing — then  alcohol  under  proper  control  is  exceed- 
ingly valuable.  All  physiologists,  even  Liebig,  declare  that  alcohol 
is  beneficial  to  those  past  middle  life,  but  many  of  them  pro- 
nounce it  injurious  (except  medicinally)  for  the  young.  They 
are  right,  from  a  psychological  standpoint,  because  the  business  of 
the  younger  is  rather  to  consume,  of  the  elder  to  produce,  thought. 

As  for  those  few — for  they  are  few  compared  with  the  vast 


Co 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


number  of  consumers — who  take  alcohol  to  excess,  not  for  their 
health's  sake,  not  for  brain  work,  not  for  rations'  enjoyment,  but 
simply  and  solely  to  kill  time,  to  stimulate  their  baser  passions, 
or  to  drown  thought  by  stupefying  themselves — why  the  sooner 
they  are  put  in  an  asylum  the  better.  But  it  is  too  much  to  ask 
that  all  mankind  should  forego,  what  (as  the  authorities  already 
quoted  and  many  others  that  co"H  be  adduced,  assure  us)  has 
been  a  tremendous  agent  of  man's  advance,  in  order  to  reclaim 
the  few  sots  who  are  deficient  in  will  power.  It  is  hardly  worth 
while  to  pull  down  a  whole  house  in  order  to  get  rid  of  a  few  rats : 
it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  "prohibit"  the  St.  Lawrence  because 
some  get  drowned. 

4.  Herein  lies  the  reason  why  so  many  "  clever  '  men — brain- 
workers  of  acknowledged  ability — leaders  of  men,  leaders  of 
thought  and  action — throughout  the  world's  history,  have  suc- 
cumbed to  the  temptation  of  excess  in  the  use  of  alcohol.  They 
know  how  invaluable  it  is  as  a  brain  energizer — but  alas !  through 
their  intemperance  they  have  exposed  themselves  to  the  scorn  of 
prohibitionists.  Such  writers  and  orators,  who  are  very  keen 
in  seeing  everybody's  faults  but  their  own,  have  ransacked  all  his- 
tory, from  Alexander  the  Great  down  to  Daniel  Webster,  Pitt, 
Fox,  Sheridan  and  contemporary  public  men,  to  "  point  their  moral 
and  adorn  their  tale."  It  is  painful  and  saddening  to  hear  the 
failing  of  men  to  whom  the  world  owes  an  eternal  debt  of  grati- 
tude, dragged  forth  and  gibbetted  on  prohibition  platforms  by 
creatures  whose  very  names  will  be  forgotten,  when  the  grateful 
memories  of  such  "drunkards"  are  still  fresh  and  green.  When 
such  a  man  as  Daniel  Webster  is  thus-  exposed  to  public  odium 
(as  he  was  in  Toronto  a  short  while  ago)  as  an  "  awful  example  " 
of  the  use  of  alcohol,  one  is  justified  in  replying  :  It  is  a  \)\\.y  for 
himself,  that  Daniel  Webster  drank  to  excess :  but  it  would  have 
been  a  thousand  pities,  it  would  have  been  an  irreparable  loss, 
for  huma)tity  at  large  if  Daniel  Webster  had  been  a  total  abstainer 
all  his  life. 

5.  It  will  be  said  in  reply  by  prohibitionists :  "We  can  show 
the  names  of  those  who  have  been  leaders  of  men  and  yet 
total  abstainers."  Now  in  discussing  this  point,  let  us  first  caution 
the  reader — and  we  do  it  with  sorrow — that  the  statements  of  pro- 
hibitionists are  not  to  be  taken  without  strict  investigation. 


i* 


ALCOHOL  AS  A  BRAIN  IN  VIGOR  ATOR. 


6i 


English  prohibitionists  quote  Hanlan  as  an  example;  I  think 
we  Canadians  know  better.  So  we  hear  of  Generals  Wolseley 
and  Gordon  :  Mr.  Sutton  Sharp,  (in  Fortnightly,  quoted  before.) 
has  exposed  this  falsity.  Some  obituary  notices  of  the  late  Henry 
Ward  Beecher  have  spoken  of  him  as  a  total  abstainer.  This  is 
false,  and  I  can  produce  evidence  to  that  effect,  if  challenged.  On 
the  rontrary  Mr.  Beecher,  (who,  whatever  his  oddities,  was  at  any 
rate  a  fearlessly  outspoken  man),  in  a  sermon  on  St.  John,  IV,  15, 
preached  in  the  spring  of  1884,  and  published  in  the  papers,  thus 
expressed  himself  concerning  total  abstinence : 

*'  I  doubt  whether  this  absolutely  unstimulating  way  of  life 
will  answer  the  purpose  of  civilization,  or  be  as  healthy  as  another 
way  would  be.  The  more  brains  men  have,  and  the  more  brain- 
work,  the  more  they  are  apt  to  be  addicted  to  some  form  of  stim- 
ulants, milder  or  severer,  and  only  now  and  then  can  you  find  a 
man  who  is  absolutely  simple  in  his  habits,  drinking  water  and 
eating  bread  and  meat  or  vegetables.  Nor  among  them  do  we 
find  the  most  robust,  the  most  absolutely  industrious,  the  most 
persistently  accomplishing  specimens  of  men." 

Now  here  we  can  fancy  the  Canadian  prohibitionist  will  say : 
"Look  at  the  Hon.  Ed.  Blake*;  there  is  a  man  who,  as  he  avows 
(see  Globe,  loth  January),  has  been  a  total  abstainer  for  the  last 
thirteen  years,  and  there  you  have  a  man  of  gigantic  intellect  and 
serene  soul." 

We  readily  grant  this  ;  here  is  an  undoubted  instance.  But 
exceptions  prove  the  rule.  If  we  meet,  as  we  can  do  every  day, 
a  sceptic  or  agnostic,  whose  outward  conduct  puts  to  shame  that 
of  many  professed  Christians,  we  do  not,  therefore,  conclude  that 
Christianity  is  altogether  useless.  Besides,  Mr.  Blake  has  not 
been  all  his  life  a  total  abstainer ;  and  we  must  take  into  consider- 
ation how  much  he  may  be  indebted  for  his  great  intellect  to 
the  millions  of  gallons  of  alcohol  that  his  progenitors  must  have 
drunk — for  prohibitionists  are  fond  of  telling  us  of  the  "cumula- 
tive "  effects  of  the  "  poison  "  of  alcohol.  And,  moreover,  it  is 
impossible  to  decide  whether  Mr.  Blake's  mental  faculties   are 


*  The  Hon.  Edw.  Blake,  frequently  mentioned  In  these  papers,  has  been  for  some  time 
the  leader  of  the  Opposition  in  the  House  of  Commons  in  Canada.  The  Government  party 
are  called  Conservatives  or  "Tories,"  of  whom  only  lo  per  cent.,  it  is  estimated,  are  pro- 
hibitionists ;  while  the  Oppeeition  are  called  Liberals  or  "Grits,"  of  whom  some  75  per 
cent,  are  supposed  to  be  ia  favor  of  prohibition.  The  "  Tori(  s  "  tax  the  "  Grits  "  with  hav- 
ing no  settled  policy  :  they  can  object  to  every  scheme  proposed,  but  never  devise  any. 


68 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION, 


greater  or  less  as  a  total  abstainer  than  they  would  have  been 
otherwise.*  All  parties  admit  and  admire  his  immense  analytical 
powers;  but  men's  opinions,  even  among  his  followers,  are  much 
divided  as  to  those  constructive,  originating,  designing  qualities 
that  come  under  the  term  **  imagination,"  which  Dugald  Stewart 
calls  "  the  great  'pring  of  human  activity,  and  the  principal  source 
of  human  improvement." 

We  cannot  be  guided  in  legislating  on  such  a  subject  by  an 
exceptional  instance  here  and  there.  We  have  still  before  us  the 
broad  fact  that  the  greatest  and  most  brilliant  brain  work  of  the 
world  has  been  done  by  consumers  of  alcohol ;  and  that  such 
consumption,  for  generation  after  generation,  for  thousands  of 
years,  has  resulted  not  in  physical  and  mental  degeneracy,  but  in 
producing  the  most  vigorous  and  progressive  nations  of  the  world. 


No.  XIV. 


quehies  addressed  to  mcv  of  boience. 


%^. 


This  paper  may  be  looked  upon  as  parenthetical,  for  herein  I 
address  myself  simply  and  solely  to  men  of  science.  I  do  not,  of 
course,  mean  such  "  scientists  "  as  Rev.  J.  B.  Hamilton,  of  Chicago, 
whom  I  have  often  quoted  ;  those  who  talk  so  glibly  of  "  science  " 
and  yet  show  their  crass  ignorance.  But  I  mean  those  who  have 
made  a  life-long  study  of  Nature  and  her  laws ;  those  who  are 
capable  of  abstract  thought ;  and  who  know  something  of  the 
new  departures  in  physics  and  philosophy.  I  beseech  all  others 
to  pass  this  paper  by  ;  for  they  will  only  misunderstand  and  mis- 
interpret it :  let  them  conclude  that  I  am  writing  either  wildly  or 
jestingly  as  they  please.     I  address  myself  to  scientists  only. 

Fathers  and  brethren — (for  herein  I  confess  myself  a  tyro  :  I 
step  down  from  my  theological  platform  and  become  a  learner  : 
I  sit  at  your  feet,  and,  like  an  oriental  scholar,  ask  questions). 

•  This  paper  will  be  of  a  speculative  character.  (Of  course  you 
will  understand  the  term  ;  not  as  a  critic  of  one  of  my  publica- 
tions in  which  I  had  used  the  expression,  ''  I  grant  that  these 
views  may  be  too  speculative  to  be  preached  as  dogmatic  truths," 


QUEK/ES  ADDRESSED  TO  MEN  OF  SCIENCE. 


63 


who  thereupon  taxed  me  with  issuing  my  pamphlet  '*  as  a  specula- 
tion.") 

1.  I  wish  to  ask  you,  fathers  and  brethren,  concerning  the 
full  force  of  the  expression,  "  alcohol  stimulates  the  imagination." 
I  believe  you  will  assent  to  the  general  correctness  of  my  previous 
definition,  that  the  imagination  is  that  faculty  of  the  mind  which 
chiefly  distinguishes  man  from  the  lower  animals — (not  that  they 
are  altogether  devoid  of  it.  "  Darwin's  Descent  of  Man,"  Part  I, 
sec.  1 18) — the  designing,  creating,  originating  faculty  :  as  opposed 
to  the  perceptive  faculties,  in  which  the  lower  animals  often  sur- 
pass us.  It  is  the  preponderance  of  the  imagination  which  makes 
the  brain  of  the  lowest  type  of  savage  immensely  larf^er  than  that 
of  the  highest  type  of  ape,  while  the  brain  of  the  highest  type  of 
man  is  in  a  like  ratio  greater  than  that  of  the  savage.  ("  Man's 
Place  in  Nature,"  Huxley). 

Now,  when  told  that  alcohol  "  stimulates  "  the  imagination, 
the  popular  idea — which  is  fostered  by  prohibition  agitators — is 
that  alcohol  acts  "  like  a  whip  or  spur,"  /.  e.,  an  irritant  exciting 
the  blood,  etc.,  into  undue  expenditure  of  energy,  without  giving 
anything  in  return.  Now  would  it  not  be  well  if  such  prohibition 
agitators  would  take  a  course  of  instruction  in,  not  only  the 
physiological  action  of  alcohol  and  its  assimilation,  but  also  the 
Conservation  of  Energy,  and  the  works  of  Clifford,  Bain,  etc., 
on  the  Correlation  of  Mind  and  Matter  ?  Under  such  a  course 
of  study  would  they  not  learn  that  alcohol  not  only  provokes 
energy  but  imparts  it  ?  And  then  further,  seeing  that  one  may 
speak  scientifically  of  a  lump  of  coal  as  being  (in  view  of  its  past 
history)  concentrated  sunbeams,  would  it  not  be  in  perfect  keep- 
ing to  speak  of  alcohol  (in  view  of  its  "  promise  and  potency")  as 
Bottled  Imagination  ? 

2.  Again,  fathers  and  brethren  ;  if  alcohol  does  stimulate  the 
imagination — if  alcohol  consumers  are  (according  to  the  authori- 
ties quoted)  nation  for  nation,  more  vigorous,  mentally  and  physi- 
cally, than  abstainers — if  prohibition  so  works  that  the  scrupulous 
and  virtuous  become  total  abstainers,  while  the  unscrupulous  and 
vicious  still  get  their  liquor  somehow  :  will  not  the  ultimate 
result  be  that  the  worse  characters  will  become  the  more  vigorous, 
and  by  "  natural  selection  "  the  better  and  purer  types  of  human- 
ity will  go  to  the  wall  ?    Of  course,  like  all  instances  of  evolution 


64 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


m 


this  will  take  time,  as  Dr.  Everts  says  (see  page  54) ;  but  is  not 
the  process  already  begun  amongst  us  ? 

3.  Again,  supposing  the  theory  of  evolution  is  true — mind  I 
do  not  commit  myself  to  it  :  it  is  at  present  sub  judice,  and, 
although  the  evidence  in  its  favor  is  accumulating,  still  the  ver- 
dict at  present  is  "  not  proven  " — Supposing,  I  say,  it  is  true  ;  is 
it  not  worthy  of  enquiry  what  part  alcohol  has  played  in  this 
evolution  ?  The  imagination  has  been,  somehow^  wonderfully 
developed.  Is  alcohol  yet  to  be  credited  with  any  share  ia  the 
"  Descent  of  Man  ?"  '  .  ;^    '    ■  '  : 

4.  We  are  constantly  told  by  prohibitionists  that  the  brutes 
are  wiser  than  men,  because  having  been  once  dosed  with 
alchohol,  they  ever  after  turn  from  it  with  loathing.  (See  article, 
Alcohol,  "  U.  S.  Dispensatory,  1884  ;"  also,  '  Darwin's  Descent  of 
Man,"  Part  I,  sec.  11).  But  there  are  exceptions  to  this  :  the 
following  instance  is  furnished  by  Dr.  Miller,  in  his  "Alcohol, 
its  place  and  power  :" 

"  In  a  home  park  a  pensioned  pony  was  leisurely  spending  the 
evening  of  his  days  under  the  kind  care  of  his  master's  widow. 
One  day  she  Avas  alarmed  by  seeing  the  poor  beast  rolling  on  the 
ground,  evidently  in  pain.  The  groom  was  summoned  :  his 
diagnosis  was  prompt — colic  ;  and  his  prescrir>tion  consisted  of  a 
couple  of  bottles  of  mulled  ale,  which  the  pony  drank  readily,  and 
with  obvious  relief.  In  a  d-iy  or  two,  however,  the  attack  recurred, 
and  the  dose  had  to  be  repeated.  In  a  few  days  more  there  was 
another  relapse,  when  the  same  remedy  sufficed  for  cure  ;  but 
after  a  time,  the  rolling  and  kicking  having  become  matters  of 
daily  occurrence,  and  always  in  front  of  the  drawing-room  win- 
dows, suspicion  arose  as  to  their  truthfulness  ;  and  a  little  watch- 
ing convicted  the  poor  pony  of  shamming  the  disease  for  the  sake 
of  ';he  cure.  The  ale  was  accordingly  withheld  and  the  colic  did 
not  return." 

Surely  that  pony's  imagination  was  stimulated  ! 
Another  very  striking  instance  is  given  in  a  late  number  of 
Casscl's  Faniily  Magazine,  to  which  I  beg  to  call  your  attention. 

The  article  referred  to  described  the  ways  and  habits  of  the 
elephants  which  are  employed  in  the  British  military  service  in 
India,  and  gave  instances  of  their  surprising  intelligence.      It 


-V^  ::.. 


QUERIES  ADDRESSED  TO  MEN  OF  SCIENCE. 


65 


states  that  whenever  a  dispute  arises  between  an  elephant  in  the 
service  and  his  "  mahout,"  or  driver,  a  regular  court-martial  is 
held  ;  evidence  is  called  for  on  both  sides,  and  cou^plainant  and 
defendant  have  an  equally  fair  hearing.  On  one  occasion  an 
elephant  was  charged  with  having  given  his  mahout  a  most  un- 
merciful pounding  with  his  trunk.  The  evidence  conclusively 
proved  that  the  driver  had  been  badly  pounded.  When  the  turn 
came  for  the  defence,  the  elephant  knelt  down — not  to  ask  for 
pardon  but — to  point  with  the  tip  of  his  trunk  to  the  wounds  on 
hij,  neck  and  forehead  which  the  mahout  had  inflicted  upon  him. 
Thereupon  the  men  was  sentenced  to  so  many  days'  extra  drill 
and  confinement  in  barracks,  while  the  defendant,  the  elephant, 
was  honorably  acquitted  and  awarded — oh,  tell  it  not  in  Gath  ! — 
a  bottle  of  rum  !  ! 

And  it  seems  that  this  is  the  way  they  always  reward  any 
special  effort  of  intelligence  or  sagacity  (or  shall  we  say  imagina- 
tion ?j  on  the  part  of  an  elephant  in  the  service. 

Now  let  me  ask  you,  fathers  and  brethren,  do  you  consider 
that  the  said  alcohol  has  played  any  part  in  "  stimulating  the 
imagination  "  of  these  sagacious  brutes,  or  in  developing  their 
brain  power  ? 

4.  This  opens  up  another  speculation.  Supposing  the  whole 
human  race  were  finally  educated  up  to  prohibition  principles. 
Supposing  all  were  at  last  fully  convinced  that  alcohol  was 
in  all  cases  a  "  deadly  poison  "  and  had  abandoned  its  use  every- 
%vhere,  and  the  hopes  and  dreams  of  the  W.  C.  T.  U.  were  com- 
pletely realized.  And  supposing  (for  it  is  not  quite  beyond  the 
bounds  of  possibility)  a  member  of  some  collateral  branch  of  our 
family,  some  anthropoid  ape,  for  instance,  were,  accidentally  of 
course,  to  hit  upon  the  mani'facture  of  some  fermented  drink. 
Supposing  the  consumption  of  such  beverage  became  habitual 
with  him  and  his  kin.  Is  there  any  possibility,  fathers  and 
brethren,  that  they  would  in  -consequence  become  a  ruling  race, 
and  that  we  humans  should  have  eventually  to  succumb  to,  say, 
our  cousins  the  Gorillas  ? 


66 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


No.  XV. 


SUMMING  UP.— CONCLUSION. 


t 


We  do  not  intend  to  discuss  in  these  pages  the  economic 
aspect  of  prohibition.  We  leave  it  for  experts  in  finance  to  in- 
form us  whether  it  will  bring  the  country  gain  or  loss.  For  our 
part  we  have  only  to  say  :  If  alcohol  is  an  unmitigated  curse  ; 
if  it  is  a  "  purely  selfish  indulgence,"  and  nothing  more  ;  if  it 
brings  evil  only,  and  no  good  ;  if  it  is  the  "  Devil's  instrument," 
"  the  device  of  Satan,"  "  the  accursed  thing,"  etc.,  etc.,  which  it  is 
said  to  be  ;  then  in  God's  name  prohibit  it,  whatever  money  loss 
such  action  may  entail.  God  forbid  that  any  one,  for  the  sake 
of  mere  gain,  should  advocate  the  traffic  in  an  absolute  "  curse  ;  " 
God  forbid  that  we  should  seek  to  prosper  materially  as  a  nation 
upon  the  "price  of  blood." 

But  all  the  same,  if  it  be  so,  we  must  say  :  There  is  a  mistake 
in  the  Bible  somewhere.  There  is  no  mistake  whatever  about  the 
prohibitions  of  Mohammed  and  Buddha  :  "  he  that  runs  may  read  " 
their  interdicts.  If  prohibitionist  arguments  are  sound,  then  the 
^Vord  of  God  is  faulty,  to  say  the  least,  in  not  making  this  as 
clear  as  the  other  two  religions  have  done,  and  in  misleading  for 
so  many  centuries  the  countless  millions  of  its  adherents.  This 
is  to  shake  our  confidence  in  Revelation  ;  this  is  to  cause  the 
Bible  to  be  "  wounded  in  the  house  of  its  friends."  There  are 
plenty  to-day,  without  the  aid  of  Christian  believers,  to  follow  in 
thf,'  wake  of  Robert  Ingersoli  and  tell  us  about  the  "  Mistakes  of 
Moses:"  prohibitionists  have  added  another  "mistake"  to  his 
list. 

But  "let  God  be  true  though  every  man  a  liar."  We  have 
shown  already  that  the  sanctions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  have 
been  vindicated  by  the  history  and  experience  of  the  world  ; 
while  the  prohibitions  of  Mohammed  and  Buddha  have  resulted 
in  mental  and  moral  degradation.  V/e  have  shown  how  the  con- 
sumption of  alcohol — permitted  to  the  individual  and  enjoined  in 
the  ritual  of  the  Church,  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments — 
has  ever  been  the  concomitant  of  liberty  and  progress,  of  increased 


SUMMING  UP~CONCLUSIOi\\ 


67 


mental  and  physical  power  and  of  human  development  in  every 
phase  of  life. 

2.  Nor  have  we  laid  ourselves  out  in  these  papers  to  discuss 
the  question  of  temperence/ri7/<fr  y  how  to  restrain  drunkenness 
and  check  the  evils  of  excess.  Schemes  innumerable  to  this  end 
are  already  before  the  public  ;  let  such  of  them  as  do  not  thwart 
the  Christian  method  have  every  encouragement.  The  Christian 
method  is  to  treat  men  as  freemen,  to  teach  them  to  exercise 
self-control,  in  dependence  on  the  grace  of  God.  It  is  to  be  ex- 
pected, as  a  matter  of  course,  that  under  the  "  Law  of  Liberty  " 
some  will  fail  of  self-control  in  this  vice,  as  in  all  other  vices  and 
crimes.  "  It  must  needs  be  that  offences  come."  But  commun- 
ity of  goods  is  not  the  true  remedy  for  theft,  polygamy  and  the 
life  of  the  convent  are  not  the  true  safeguards  of  the  seventh 
commandment  ;  the  censorship  of  the  press  and  the  Index  Ex- 
purgatorius  are  not  the  true  means  for  counteracting  improper 
literature,  and  sumptuary  enactments  and  Blue  Laws  are  not  the 
true  way  to  prevent  undue  mdulgence  among  Christians  and 
freemen. 

3.  We  have  endeavored  to  pay  all  due  regard  to  those  who  choose 
to  abstain.  We  have  shuwn  that  teetotalism  is  not  good  for  the 
race  at  large,  whatever  it  may  be  for  the  individual.  Undoubt- 
edly some  are  so  constituted  that  abstinence  is  their  only  safety  ; 
but  for  many,  aye,  very  many,  teetotalism  means  not  safety  but 
ruin  to  their  health,  as  medical  men  have  testified.  It  means 
increase  of  heart  disease  by  substituting  tea,  which  is  pernicious 
in  such  cases  (see  Dr.  Yeo's  article  in  Nineteenth  Century,  March, 
1886,)  for  alcohol  which  is  i  neficial.  It  means  increase  of  con- 
sumption and  1  ironchitis  by  robbing  those  so  afflicted  of  a  most 
valuable  agent.  (See  page  29.)  St.  Paul  was  not  "mistaken" 
when  he  urged  S  Timothy,  though  he  was  a  bishop,  to  quit  his 
teetotalism. 

No,  we  make  no  scorn  of  those  who  abstain,  whether  for  con- 
science sake  or  as  a  matter  of  prudence.  But  there  are  amongst 
them  m.en  whom  Rev.  Mr.  Crawford,  at  the  temperance  meeting 
in  Toronto,  on  12th  May,  justly  held  up  to  scorn,  because  they, 
on  account  of  their  teetotalism,  plumed  themselves  on  being,  as 
he  said,  a  "temperance  aristocracy  ;"  those  who  "  trust  m  them- 
selves that  they  are  righteous  and  despise  others."     To  such  we 


"r^' 


■ 


68 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


say  :  "Who  art  thou  that  judgest  another  man's  servant  ?   To  his 
own  master  he  standeth  or  falleth."     (Rom.  xiv,  4.) 

4.  The  idea  that  prohibition  is  going  to  do  away  with  crime — 
like  the  idea  of  former  days  that  education  would  bring  about 
this  happy  consummation — is  altogether  fallacious.  We  have 
already  (see  pages  48  and  56)  shewn  this,  and  the  experience  of 
every  day  confirms  it.  Some  of  the  biggest  scoundrels  in  Canada — 
from  D.  K.  Rine,  down  to  Mr.  Ward,  the  late  Secretary  of  West 
End  Christian  Temperance  Association  of  Toronto,  and  Mr.  L. 
Cleverdon,  the  forger,  late  reeve  of  Strathroy,  and  warden  of  Mid- 
dlesex— have  been  great  "Temperance  "  men. 

5.  If  prohibitionists  think  they  can  force  all  mankind  back  to 
an  unstimulating  way  of  living,  they  make  a  grand  mistake.  We 
cannot  go  back  to  the  simple,  frugal,  homely  fare  of  fruits  and 
berries  of  our  primitive  savage  ancestors  ;  at  least  if  we  do  we 
shall  go  back  also  to  their  poverty  of  mind.  And  of  all  cerebral 
stimulants  alcohol  is  the  least  dangerous  and  most  controllable. 
(See  page  51,  also  Times  article  on  alcoholic  drinks,  and  Popular 
Science  Monthly,  April,  18S4).  Prohibiting  all  alcohol  means 
mental  degeneracy  of  the  race  and  resort  to  the  stimulants  of  the 
Turks  and  Chinese.  The  ''  physicians  and  pastors "  of  New 
York  can  bear  testimony  to  this.  To  endeavor  to  suppress  all 
stimulants  whatsoever  is  like  striving  to  sweep  back  the  ocean's 
tide.  The  history  of  prohibition,  wherever  tried,  from  the  times 
of  Guatama,  down  to  the  experience  of  our  own  Scott  Act  coun- 
ties, ought  to  satisfy  us  of  this.- 

6.  We  protest  against  prohibition,  because  it  is  coercion  of  the 
vilest  character.  Our  legislators  have  passed  bold  resolutions 
denouncing  the  contemplated  "  Coercion  "  of  the  Home  Govern- 
ment ;  and  at  the  same  time  enforce  coercion  on  us  in  the  matter  of 
the  liquor  traffic.  The  Scott  Act  of  Canada  contains  clauses 
which  no  statesman  of  England  would  dare  to  introduce  into  any 
Crimes  Bill.  The  following  are  extracts  from  a  leader  in  the 
Orangeville  Sun  of  28th  April,  18S7  : 

"  It  seems  strange  that  in  the  jubilee  year  of  Her  Majesty's 
reign,  and  in  the  year  of  Grace,  1887,  the  dial  of  time  should  turn 
so  far  backward,  that  in  a  portion  of  that  empire  whose  proud 
boast  it  has  been  that 'Britons  never  shall  be  slaves,' an  act  of 
tyranny  without  parallel  in  hundreds  of  years  of  British  history 


SUMMING  UP— CONCLUSION. 


69 


should  receive  the  solemn  and  deliberate  sanction  of  a  parliament 
of  men  of  British  blood." 

"  To  say  nothing  of  what  may  occur  there  is  abundant  evidence 
of  the  outrageous  nature  of  this  law  in  the  actual  facts  that  exist. 
A  most  respectable  anti-Scott  citizen  who,  it  is  well  known  to  all 
his  neighbors,  does  not  sell  liquor,  recently  gave  a  glass  of  liquor 
to  two  travellers  who  entered  his  house  on  a  cold  winter's  night. 
For  this  act  of  charity  the  man  paid  fifty  dollars  and  costs.  A 
woman  of  three  score  and  ten,  in  whose  house  some  bottles  of 
porter  were  found,  was  dragged  on  her  back  by  manacles  and 
hauled  away  to  jail.  Judge  Armour  openly  stated  f'"om  the  bench 
in  Osgoode  Hall  that '  it  seems  terrible  that  any  person  could  be 
convicted  on  such  evidence.'  " 

"  Shades  of  Hampden  and  Elliott,  look  down  !  Have  Britons 
degenerated  ?  Is  the  spirit  of  liberty  become  extinct  ?  Are 
hypocrisy  and  time-serving  the  only  rules  for  a  parliament  which 
passes  resolutions  condemning  Irish  coercion — though  that  allows 
appeals — and  at  the  same  time  forces  a  coercion  measure  more 
extreme  in  its  nature  than  Ireland  ever  knew  ? " 

"  In  both  political  parties  are  men  who  hate  tyranny,  and 
realize  the  purposes  which  the  government  ought  to  fulfil,  and 
love. country  before  party.  The  time  is  one  of  shame  and  dis- 
grace. Parliament  is  no  longer  free.  It  now  remains  for  the 
people  to  defend  their  own  liberties." 

7.  That  such  an  element  as  alcohol  should  be  an  instrument 
of  evil  as  well  as  of  good,  is  in  accordance  with  the  whole  econ- 
omy of  nature  and  the  laws  of  God.  He  has  so  ordained  all 
things  that  what  is  good  when  rightly  used  is  evil  when  misused. 
The  Christian  believer — seeing  that  we  cannot  crush  a  fruit  under 
our  heel  but  alcohol  is  the  result,  seeing  how  God  has  made  it  so 
available,  so  easily  procured  from  almost  every  root  and  grain  of 
earth — hears  His  voice,  saying  of  this  as  of  everytliitig  in  Nature 
and  in  Grace,  what  he  said  by  Moses  to  Israel :  "  See,  I  have  set 
before  thee  life  and  death,  blessing  and  cursing,  good  and  evil." 

In  alcohol  we  behold  a  mighty  power  for  good  or  ill,  accord- 
ing as  it  is  used  :  used  with  judgment,  a  power  for  preventing 
disease,  for  prolonging  life,  for  enhancing  our  joys,  for  alleviating 
our  griefs,  for  promoting  our  happiness  ;  a  power  for  provoking- 
thought,  for  energizing  the  brain,  for  quickening  the  creative 


1A 


70 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


m 


faculties  ;  a  power  which  has  gone  hand  in  hand  with  the  pro- 
gress of  the  races  of  men,  and  whose  benefits  have  been  incalcula- 
ble. On  the  other  hand,  a  power  which  abused  brings  noc  life 
but  death,  not  invigoration  of  the  mind  but  its  destruction,  not 
joy  but  unspeakable  misery,  not  happiness  but  hell. 

It  is  like  every  other  force,  every  other  element  ;  it  follows  the 
natural  law.  We  may  view  the  mighty  river  only  to  brood  over 
the  sacrifice  of  life  it  has  caused,  forgetting  its  untold  benefits  ; 
we  may  think  of  steam  or  electricity  or  gunpowder  only  to  recall 
some  ghastly  accident.  So  we  may  think  of  alcohol,  only  to  re- 
member the  ruin  and  misery  which  its  abuse  has  entailed  here 
and  there. 

"  The  evil  that  men  do  lives  after  them 
The  good  is  oft  interred  with  their  bones." 

The  evils  of  its  abuse  are  manifest  and  glaring  ;  yet  for  all 
that  it  has  done  immeasurably  more  good  than  harm. 

The  very  gospel  of  Christ  is,  we  know,  **  a  savour  of  life  unto 
life  or  of  death  unto  death  ; "  and  wine  is  often  and  most  fittingly 
used  by  the  sacred  writers  as  an  emblem  of  that  gospel ;  for  wine 
is  a  life  out  of  death — a  new  life  out  of  decay — and  yet  a  life 
which,  misused,  brings  destruction  and  woe. 

8.  As  we  review  the  history  of  the  world,  and  observe,  on  the 
one  hand  Christ  and  his  Church  saying  :  ''  take  this  element  of 
alcohol,  use  it  and  it  will  be  a  blessing  ;  abuse  it  and  it  will  be  a 
curse  ;  "  and  on  the  other  hand,  Islamism  and  Buddhism  saying, 
"  alcohol  is  an  unmitigated  curs^,  we  prohibit  it  altogether  ; "  and 
as  we  notice  after  so  many  centuries  the  several  results  of  their 
teachings,  must  we  not  confess  that  the  Divine  Wisaom  has  been 
"justified  of  her  children:"  And  now  shall  we  reverse  the 
teachings  of  scripture  and  history,  and  return  to  the  barbarous 
prohibitions  of  the  East  ?  This  "  crusade  "  against  alcohol  is 
like  all  '*  crusades  ;  "  founded  on  fanaticism  and  destined  to  come 
to  an  Ignoble  end.  But  the  opponents  of  this  fanatical  onslaught 
must  be  firm  and  true  and  outspoken^  feeling  that  they  are  fighting, 
not  for  "  a  purely  selfish  indulgence,"  but  for  a  great  principle  in 
which  religion  and  liberty  are  both  involved — a  principle  which, 
in  spite  of  frequent  and  great  disasters,  has  yet  accomplished  mar- 
vellous things  in  the  civilization  and  progress  of  the  world.  We 
must  resist  prohibition  because  it  implies  an  insult  to  our  Lord 


'^1 


SUMMING  UP— CONCLUSION. 


71 


and  Master,  in  distorting  His  Holy  Word,  and  depraving  His 
Holy  Sacrament  ;  and  because  it  is  an  unwarrantable  interference 
with  the  liberty  of  the  subject.  We  must  rally  round  this  stand- 
ard ;  we  must  fight  prohibition  on  this  issue  ;  and  our  battle  cry 
must  be  as  of  old  : 

"  PRO    ARIS    ET    FOCIS." 

9.  As  we  began  our  argument,  so  would  we  close  it,  with  the 
Word  of  God.  But  first  let  us  reiterate  ;  we  speak  not  a  word 
against  those  who  are  nobly  and  self-denyingly  striving  to  reclaim 
the  drunkard  and  to  check  the  prevalence  of  this  particular  sin — 
we  are  only  resisting  those  who  advocate  Coercion.  The  only 
"  argument,"  if  such  it  can  be  called,  which  prohibitionists  can 
wrench  from  the  Scriptures  is  the  text  :  "  It  is  good  neither  to  eat 
flesh  nor  drink  wine  nor  anything  whereby  thy  brother  stumblcth." 
(Romans  xiv,  21.)  It  is  scarcely  worth  while  to  answer  such  an 
argument  seriously  ;  one  would  think  that  the  verse  immediately 
preceding  and  that  immediately  following  the  text  were  enough  to 
show  that  such  a  course  as  coercive  prohibition  was  the  last  thing 
in  the  apostle's  mind  regarding  either  meats  or  drinks.  Perhaps 
the  best  plan  to  meet  such  "  argument  "  is  the  argumcntum  ad 
absurdum  which  we  borrow  from  the  Doiiiiinon  Churchman  of  19th 
May  :  "The  tongue  is  an  unruly  member,  and  by  it  untold  harm 
and  evil  have  been  wrought  ;  therefore  let  us  prohibit  all  speech." 

St.  Paul  does  indeed  say  :  (I  Cor.  viii.  13,)  "  If  meat  make  my 
brother  to  offend  I  will  eat  no  flesh  while  the  world  standeth  ;  " 
but  he  does  not  add  ;  "  And  I  will  see  that  nobody  else  shall, 
and  I  will  agitate  to  get  coercive  laws  passed  to  that  effect."  The 
whole  drift  of  the  Apostle's  argument  in  both  the  chapters,  (Rom. 
xiv  and  I  Cor.  viii,)  from  which  the  above  texts  are  extracted,  is 
as  follows  : 

ist.  To  assert,  and  insist  upon,  the  full  and  complete  liberty  of 
the  Christian  in  the  matter  of  meats  and  drinks. 

2nd.  To  concede  that  "  weaker  brethren  "  (probably  the  later 
converts  from  Judaism  and  Idolatry,)  would  naturally  bring  with 
them  into  the  Church  the  prejudices  of  their  early  training  :  the 
Jew  finding  it  hard  to  free  himself  all  at  once  from  the  prohibitory 
enactments  as  to  meats,  etc.,  of  the  law  of  Moses  and  of  the 
"  tradition  of  the  elders  ;  "  and  the  Greek  clinging  to  his  old- 
time  habits  and  superstitions. 


7a 


PAPERS  ON  PROHIBITION. 


3d.  To  bid  those  "  strong  in  faith  "  to  deal  tenderly  with  these 
prejudices ;  and  while  possessing  full  liberty  themselves  yet  not  to 
flaunt  that  liberty  before  the  "  weaker  brethren,"  so  as  to  wound 
their  feelings  or  make  them  act  against  their  convictions. 

See  also  I  Cor.  x,  23-33,  where,  after  a  long  digression,  more 
sua,  the  Apostle  Paul  closes  his  instructions  concerning  meats 
sacrificed  to  idols. 

The  Apostle's  whole  argument  is  the  very  opposite  of  prohibi- 
tion 

On  the  contrary  St.  Paul  warns  us  that  coercive  prohibitory 
legislation  will  be  a  sign  of  decadence  of  faith  in  the  later  times. 
(I  Tim.  iv,  1-5.)     "  Some  "  says  he  ''shall  depart  from  the  faith 
.     .     comi/iant/ini^  to  abstain  from  meats     ....     for  every 
creature  of  God  is  good." 

Here  is  the  warning  voice  of  the  Apostle,  who  bids  us  resist  the 
tyranny  of  the  "latter  times."  On  the  word  of  God  we  take  our 
stand  :  we  denounce  prohibition  as  anti-constitutional,  anti-script- 
ural, anti-Christian  :  and  we  call  upon  all  men  to  carry  out  the 
sacred  injunction  (Gal.  v,  i). 

"  STAND  FAST  THEREFORE  IN  THE  LIBERTY  WHEREWITH 
CHRIST  HAS  MADE  US  FREE  AND  BE  NOT  ENTANGLED  AGAIN 
WITH    THE   YOKE   OF    BONDAGE." 


APPENDIX. 


The   First   Miracle   of  Christ 


AHS 


PROHIBITION 


A   SERMON  PKEACIIED  IN   ST.   PETER'S  CHURCH,   BROCKVILLE,   ON  THE 
SECOND  SL'NDAY  AFTER  EPIPHANY  (ITth  JANUARY).  1886. 


"This  beginning  of  miracles  did  Jesus  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  aud  manifested  forth  His 

glory."— St.  John  ii,  n. 

IT  i.s  a  thing  for  which  we  ought  to  ho  very  thankful,  brethren,  that  the 
Church's  yearly  system  of  teaching  brings  before  us  every  incident  of 
our  dear  Lord's  life,  and  forces  into  prominence,  each  in  turn,  every  saying, 
every  work  of  His,  whether  we  personally  care  to  view  it  or  not.  In  these 
days,  when  there  are  so  many  different  kinds  of  religion,  I  think  we  may 
without  much  difficulty  discern  that  each  particular  kind  of  religion  has  its 
own  special  "  hobby,"  so  to  spc^ak.  It  takes  one  or  two  "  texts,"  and  out  of 
them  manufactures  its  own  theology  :  every  other  text  must  be  made  to  fit 
into  that,  and  is  warped  and  twisted  and  turned  until  it  does,  after  a  fashion, 
fit  in  ;  and  if,  after  all  the  manipulation,  this  cannot  be  effected,  then  it  is 
summarily  dismissed  from  the  count  as  a  "Judaism,"  or  a  "  metaphor,"  or 
an  "  Oriental  hyperbole,"  or  something  of  that  sort. 

And  as  in  other  bodies,  so  in  the  Church  of  England,  individual  preach- 
ers have  their  "hobbies,"  their  favorite  doctrines,  their  favorite  "texts." 
It  is  human  nature  after  all ;  we  are  all  partialists,  miore  or  less  ;  and  if  we 
were  left  unrestricted,  our  congregations  would  too  often  be  fed  with  some 
particular  kind  of  .spiritual  diet,  which  might  be  wholesome  and  beneficial 
in  due  proportion,  but  if  persisted  in  to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  kinds  of 
food,  would  produce  spiritual  dyspepsia — a  morbid  unhealthy  state — no 
matter  what  that  particular  doctrine  may  be. 

Now  what  a  grand  and  wholesome  corrective  to  the  individual  preacher's 
fancies  is  the  system  of  the  Church,  which  forces  us,  whether  we  will  or 
no,  to  take  in  every  species  of  food  which  the  Holy  Scriptures  contain.  For 
to  me  this  is  one  of  the  greatest  evidences  of  the  Divine  origin  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  they  are  so  multiform,  so  complex,  so  many-sided.  Our  spiritual 
nature  is  like  our  physical  nature,  very  complex  ;  and  he  who  imagines  he 


74 


APPENDIX. 


can  ndminiater  to  every  mind  diseased  by  one  prescription,  is  as  great  & 
cliarlatiin  as  he  who  thinks  lie  fan  cure  every  kind  of  physical  ill  l)y  one 
particular  dose.  The  Bible  is  not  of  this  nature  ;  it  is  very  complex,  and 
rii^htly  so  ;  It  contains  elements  apparently  antajfonistic  to  one  another ; 
just  as  our  food  for  our  bodies  must  contain  many  diverse  elements,  acid 
and  alkaline,  sweet  and  bitter.  He  thai  pro])liesieth,  says  St.  Paul  in  the 
Ei>lstle  for  this  day,  should  proi)hesy  (t.  «.,  preach)  "  according  to  the  propor- 
tion of  faith."  The  true  Churchman,  then,  I  conceive,  should  endeavor  as 
a  r\ile,  to  put  himself  en  rapport  with  the  I'turgical  services  of  the  day,  and 
like  St.  Chrysostom  and  other  mighty  preachers  of  old,  make  the  pulpit 
re-echo  the  teachings  of  the  lectern  and  the  altar. 

Now  what  is  the  great  lesson  of  to-day,  this  second  Sunday  after  Epiph- 
any ?  What  is  the  keynote  which  the  Church  strikes,  to  which  we  should 
attune  our  harmcmiesV  The  Gospel  for  the  day  furnishes  it  to  us,  and  our 
text  is  the  essence  of  that  (Jospel.  This  whole  Epiphany  season  is  but  an 
elaboration  of  the  great  song  of  praise  begun  at  Christmastide  :  "  (Jlory  to 
God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace. "  "  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Israel, 
for  He  hath  visited  and  redeemed  his  people  :  and  hath  raised  up  a  mighty 
salvation  for  us."  "  The  Days])ring  from  on  high  hath  visited  us."  The 
manifestation  of  God  in  the  flesh  is  the  theme  :  The  different  modes  and 
degrees  of  that  manifestation  the  elaboration  of  the  theme.  Afanifest  first 
to  the  shepherds  of  Bethlehem  ;  then  to  the  Ee  i  sages ;  then,  after  twelve 
years,  to  the  doctors  of  the  Temjjle,  if  only  ih  lad  had  eyes  to  see  ;  then 
after  a  long  period  of  obscuration  manifest  to  all  the  beholders  at  this  mar- 
riage feast  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  when  His  Divinity  shone  forth  in  this  first 
miracle  that  he  wrought.  Let  us  view  this  light  as  it  then  burst  forth,  so 
unexi)ectedly  ;  let  us  analyze  its  rays  and  see  what  we  can  learn  therefrom. 
^^'Yhm  beninning  of  miracles."  Our  Lord  Jesus  ('hrist,  then,  never  per- 
formed a  single  miracle — never  let  the  world  knov/  that  He  was  the  Mes- 
.siah — until  he  was  thirty  years  of  age.  All  that  long  period  of  time,  from 
His  birth,  when  "  all  the  sons  of  God  shouted  for  joy,"  until  His  baptism, 
when  tht!  voice  from  heaven  was  heard  saying,  "  Thou  art  My  lieloved  Son  " 
(Luke  iii,  22),  is  wrapt  in  obscurity,  save  that  one  gleam  which  we  catch  of 
the  Holy  Child  when  he  was  twelve  years  of  age,  and  went  up,  "  after  the 
custom  of  the  feast,"  to  His  confinnation  at  Jerusalem.  We  dwelt  upon 
this  on  Sunday  last.  Does  he  not  by  this  very  obscuration  reveal  Himself — 
to  speak  in  paradox  ?  Does  He  not  manifest  Himself  as  the  typical,  i-»e 
representative,  the  perfect  human  character  ?  Does  he  not  show  us  hereby 
that  He  does  not  countenance  precociousuess  in  children  and  youths  ?  Does 
he  not  teach  us  that  even  if  we  think  we  have  a  call  from  God  we  must 
bide  our  time  until  the  outward  call  comes  V  "So  also  Christ  glorified  not 
Himself  to  be  made  an  High  Priest,  but  He  that  said  unto  Him,  Thou  art 
My  Son  "  (Heb.  v,  5). 

Next  let  us  consider  the  circumstances  under  which  He  "  manifested  forth 
His  glory." 

It  was  at  a  marriage  feast.  In  the  East  such  entertainments  often  lasted 
a  whole  week.     What  a  strange  environment,  judging  with  human  judg- 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE  OF  CHRIST. 


75 


nient,  does  the  Lord  select  for  manifesting  forth  TTis  glory  !  A  scene  of 
festivity,  a  time  of  making  merry — of  congratulations — of  eating  and  drinlt- 
ing  1  What  a  conlrnst  to  his  precursor  John  the  Baptist — the  last  propiiet 
of  the  old  di'^pensation— the  connecting  link  between  the  Law  and  the  (Jos- 
pel — will)  conies  into  view  in  the  dreary  wilderness,  clad  in  camel's-hair 
dotli  and  leathern  girdh; — hermit-like  in  his  clothing  and  in  his  diet — 
ascetic,  austere.  To  quote  tho  words  of  Dean  Alford's  Couunentarj'  :  "  Our 
Lof!  at  once  opens  His  ministry  witli  the  character  whicli  He  gives  of  Hiin- 
Belf  "  (Luke  vii,  33,  34,  35).  "John  the  Uaptist,"  says  He  to  the  Pharisees, 
"  canio  neither  eating  bread  nor  drinking  wine  ;  and  ye  say.  He  hath  a 
devil  :  the  Son  of  Man  is  come  eating  and  drinkiii;'^  ;  and  ye  say,  Behold,  a 
gluttonous  man,  and  a  wine-bibber,  a  ii  ieud  of  publicans  and  sinners  !  But 
wisdom  is  Justified  of  all  her  children."  "He  also,"  as  Archbishop  Trench 
admirably  remarks,  "  gives  us  His  own  testimony  against  the  tendency  wliich 
our  iuilolence  ever  favors,  of  giving  up  those  things  and  occasions  to  tho 
world  and  the  devil,  which  we  have  not  Christian  boldness  to  mingle  in 
and  jmrify  .  ,  .  And  such  is  the  verdict  of  modern  religionism,  whicli 
would  keep  the  leaven  distinct  from  the  lump,  for  fear  it  should  become 
unlraKinied." 

We  are  not  given  the  name  of  the  host,  or  of  the  bride  or  bridegroom. 
Doubtless  they  were  relatives  or  connections  ol  our  Lord  according  to  the 
flesh.  C'ana  was  not  very  far  from  Nazareth  :  and  tli<;  Virgin  Mother  had 
evidently  considerable  authority  in  the  household.  (St.  John  ii.  i,  "  'I'here 
was  a  marriage  .  .  and  the  mother  of  Jesus  was  there  ;"  again,  verse  5, 

"  His  mother  saith  unto  the  servants,"  etc.)  Our  Lord  was  invited  to  this 
wedding  feasst,  and  He  went. 

"  And  when  they  wanted  wine."  This  does  not  mean  that  there  was 
none  originally  supplied,  but  that,  for  some  reason  or  other,  the  wine  ran 
short  :  either  the  festivities  lasted  longer,  'ir  the  guests  were  more  numerous, 
than  had  been  calculated  for.  You  will  observe  the  Revised  Version  ren- 
ders the  passage  correctly  :  "And  when  the  vrme  failed."  Here  let  me 
quote  a  passage  of  Archdeacon  Farrar's  "  Life  of  Christ :"  "  Whether  the 
marriage  festival  lasted  for  seven  days,  as  was  usual  among  those  who 
could  afford  it,  or  only  for  one  or  two,  as  was  the  case  among  the  poorer 
classes,  we  cannot  tell  ;  but  m*  some  period  of  the  entertainment  the  wine 
suddenly  ran  short.  None  but  those  who  know  how  sacretl  in  the  East  is 
the  dut\  of  lavish  hospitality,  and  how  passionately  tlie  obligation  to  exer- 
cise it  to  the  utmost  is  felt,  can  realize  the  gloom  which  this  incident  would 
have  thrown  over  the  occasion,  or  the  misery  and  mortification  which  it 
would  have  caused  to  the  wedded  pai'-.  They  would  have  felt  it  to  be,  as 
in  the  East  it  would  still  be  felt  to  be.  a  bitter  and  indelible  disgrace," 

In  order  to  avert  this  threatened  disaster — in  order  to  dissipate  the  gloom 
impending  over  this  festive  gathering — in  order  to  enhance  their  joy  and 
happiness — in  order  to  show  that  He  entered  heartily  into  all  their  lawful 
pleasures,  ana  sanctioned  their  innocent  enjoyments — the  Son  of  God,  the 
Eternal  Word  made  flesh,  "  manifested  forth  His  glory."  And  how  did  he 
do  so?    I  must  answer  this  question  with  a  statement  which,  1  know,  will 


w 


APPEA'D/X. 


shock  the  feelings  of  many  modern  religionists — a  statement  opposed  to  the 
spirit  of  the  age— one  whirli  may  i)ossibly  call  forth  a  storm  of  vituperation, 
and  yet  it  must  Im  said  :  for  it  is  the  truth — the  truth  of  Ood  and  of  Hia 
Holy  Word. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Clirist  began  His  Messianic  career — began  that  glorions 
and  dazzling  serifS  of  mercy-giving,  life-prolonging,  ])ain-deHtroying,  evil- 
dispelling  mirnelcs — with  the  production  of  an  alcoholic,  intoxicating  drink. 
And  that  in  no  mean  quantity  :  on  the  lowest  computation  the  amount  of 
wine  thus  divinely  manufactured  was  one  hundred  and  twenty  gallons. 
(See  Alford  in  lor.) 

Now  let  us  face  this  fact ;  for  faced  it  must  be.  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
whom  we  all  confess  to  be  Ood,  of  Ood,  and  yet  very  man,  began  his  official 
career  as  the  Messiah  with  the  miraculous  creation  of  an  intoxicating  ele- 
ment :  lie  was  all  through  his  olficial  life  assaihid  by  the  Pharisees  as  a 
"wine-bibber:"  and  His  last  official  act  was  His  consecrating  that  same 
intoxicating  element  to  be  the  sacrament  of  His  own  most  precious  blood. 

Now  what  are  we  to  make  of  this  ?  Was  Christ  mistaken  ?  Was  He 
ignorant  of  the  laws  of  hygiene  and  physiology  ?  Is  His  doctrine  behind 
the  times  V  For  there  is  of  necessity  a  terrible  mistake  somewhere.  Either 
our  modern  moral  reformers  are  wrong,  or  Jesus  Christ  was  wrong.  I  put 
it  plainly,  but  so  it  is.  The  Dominion  Churchman  very  truly  said  last  week: 
If  Christ  had  worked  that  miracle  to-day  in  one  of  our  Scott  Act  counties 
lie  would  have  been  convicted  of  a  crime.  And  so  it  is.  If  Jesus  Chri.st 
was  right,  i)rohil)ition  is  wrong.  If  prohibition  is  right,  Jesus  Christ  was 
wrong.     That  is  simply  the  naked  truth. 

And  what  escape  can  be  framed  from  this  dilemma,  viz.:  that  not  only 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  the  whole  Word  of  God,  from  beginning  to  end, 
countenances  and  makes  provision  for  the  drinking  of  intoxicating  liquor  : 
therefore  either  the  consumption  of  such  liquor  is  lawful  and  light,  or  the 
^^'o^d  of  Ood  is  wrong.     There  are  three  efforts  to  answer  this  : 

I.  The  effort  of  some  to  prove  that  there  are  two  kinds  of  "  wine  "  and 
"  strong  drink  "  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  one  alcoholic  and  the  other  non- 
alcoholic ;  that  whenever  "  wine  "  is  commended  it  means  the  unfermented 
juice  of  the  grape.  I  have  only  to  say  of  this  that  such  a  plea  is  beneath 
contempt.  No  accurate  scholar  would  ever  think  of  thus  "  handling  the 
Word  of  Ood  deceitfully."  A  great  deal  of  capital  has  been  made  by  some 
of  the  fact  that  two  words,  in  special,  occur  to  designate  "wine"  in  the 
Hebrew — the  one  "Yayin"  and  the  other  "Tirosh;"  and  they  claim  that 
one  of  these — it  makes  no  matter  which — is  alcoholic  and  the  other  non- 
alcoholic. The  Rev.  Dr,  Carry,  of  Port  Perry,  has  lately  issued  a  jiamphlet 
which  effectually  disposes  of  all  this  sophistry.  But  it  needs  no  learned 
Hebraist  to  understand  the  matter  nowadays.  The  Rev.  Dr.  Young,  a 
Presbyterian  minister,  haj  within  the  last  few  years  published  a  most  valu- 
able Analytical  Concordance  ;  and  any  ordinary  English  scholar,  by  looking 
up  the  words  "  wine  "  and  "  strong  drink  "  in  the  said  Concordance,  can  see 
for  himself  what  an  amount  of  special  pleading  and  prevarication  they  are 
guilty  of  who  resort  to  this  line  of  argument.     Prohibitionism,  it  seems, 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE  OF  CHRIST. 


77 


like  many  other  "  hobbies."  has  a  demoralizing  tendency  ;  it  blunts  all 
sense  of  manliness  aii  '  truth 

2.  The  second  efTort  to  escape  from  our  dilemma  is  one  not  quite  so  dis- 
honest as  the  last,  l)ut  e<iually  short-sighted,  and  equally  opposed  to  the 
truth  of  the  Scriptures.  It  alleges :  "We  admit  that  the  Bible  seems  to 
allow  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages;  we  admit  that  Christ  used  them  and 
countenanced  their  use  when  He  was  on  earth.  But  if  he  had  lived  now, 
and  seen  the  evil  effects  of  the  practice.  He  would  have  done  differently  " 
Surely  this  argument  has  only  to  be  thus  stated  in  its  simplicity  to  meet  itp 
own  repudiation  at  the  hands  of  any  honest  Christian  man.  Is  it  no: 
strange— jjussing  strange— that  men  who  arrogate  to  themselves  the  title  of 
"  Christians  "--men  who  fancy  they  have  a  monopoly  of  "  The  (Jospel  " — 
men  who  look  upon  all  those  who  cannot  i)ronounce  their  sliibl)oleth  as 
"  unsaved  "—men  who  boast  of  "  the  Bible  and  the  Bible  alone  "—should 
thus  s])eak  of  "Jesus  Christ,  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  ever?" — 
that  such  as  they  should  think  the  Scriptures  need  supplementing  ? — that 
they  should  make  the  Word  of  Ood  of  none  effect  through  their  tradition  V 

3.  The  third  answer  to  this  dilemma  is  that  of  the  Infidel  Prohibitionists  ; 
and  their  reply  is  :  "  It  is  true  that  the  Bible  allows  the  use  of  intoxicants  ; 
and  so  much  the  worse  for  the  Bible."  Well,  this  answer  has  the  merit,  at 
all  events,  of  being  straightforward  and  logical.  But  you  see  to  what  it 
leads.  Perhaps  you  may  be  surpriso<l  to  hear  of  Infidel  Prohibitionists  ;  yet 
there  are  very  many  of  them  in  the  United  States.  They  have  a  very 
extensive  literature  of  their  own — newspapers,  novels,  etc. — all  inculcating 
total  abstinence  and  atheism.  The  late  D.  M.  Bennett,  in  his  lifetime!  the 
editor  of  an  agnostic  paper  called  the  Truth  Seeker,  founded  a  town  in  tlu; 
State  of  Missouri,  called  Liberal,  on  a  prohibitionist  and  atheistic  basis. 
And  this  town  of  Liberal  was  advertized  in  the  various  freethinkiug  papers 
(such  as  M<in,  Tins  World,  etc.,)  in  terms  to  this  effect  t  that  in  the  said 
town  there  were  "  no  churches,  no  saloons,  no  preachers,  no  spirit-sellers, 
no  alcohol,  no  devil,  no  Christ,  no  God  !"  What  think  you  of  that  for 
prohibition  ? 

Now,  in  order  to  answer  this  third  and  last  argument,  that  of  Prohibi- 
tionist Infidels — which  at  any  rate  is  more  honest  than  either  of  the  others — 
we  must,  of  course,  meet  them  on  some  common  ground.  We  answer  it  by 
an  appeal  to  facts  and  history,  and  show  how  the  Divine  Wisdom  has  been 
justified  of  her  children.  Prohibition  is  no  new  thing  :  it  has  been  tried 
for  a  thousand  years  and  more.  Over  one  thousand  years  ago  there  were 
two  rival  systems  of  religion,  each  with  its  own  Scriptures,  struggling  for 
supremacy  in  the  East.  One  was  the  Church  of  Christ  with  its  Bible  ;  the 
other  Mohammedanism  with  its  Koran.  The  Church  of  Christ  said  to  its 
adherents  :  "  Take  this  element  of  alcohol;  use  it,  and  it  will  be  a  blessing  ; 
abuse  it,  and,  like  every  other  gift  of  (iod,  it  will  become  a  curse.  Exercise 
your  manliness,  your  self-control,  in  dependence  on  the  grace  of  God."  The 
other  religious  system,  Mohammedanism,  said  :  "  Wine  and  strong  drink 
are  an  unmitigated  curse  ;  I  prohibit  their  use.     No  follower  of  mine  can 


73 


APPENDIX. 


■1^: 


buy,  or  sell,  or  manufacture,  or  consume,  intoxicating  drink.  My  religion 
is  an  improvement  upon  that  of  Jesus  Christ.  If  He  had  lived  to-day  He 
■would  do  as  I  do." 

We  know  from  history  how  this  last-named  religion,  in  the  flush  of  its 
•iret  enthusia.sm  of  prohibition,  seemed  likely  to  wipe  out  Christianity  from 
the  face  of  the  earth.  But,  after  the  lapse  of  a  thousand  years,  what  are 
the  relative  positions,  morally  and  intellectually,  of  those  two  religious  sys- 
tems to-day?  Who  was  right  in  the  end,  Christ  or  Mohammed V  /ipart 
from  all  consideration  of  the  religious  aspect  of  the  question — for  we  are 
tiow  addressing  ourselves  to  the  infidel  argument — let  me  ask  :  Would  you 
not  rather,  a  thousand  times,  be  a  descendant  of  four  hundred  generations 
of  the  "  drunhen  "  English,  or  the  ''  drunken  "  Irisli,  or  the  "  drunken  " 
Scotch,  or  the  "  drunken  "  German.s,  tlian  of  four  hundred  generations  of 
the  total  abstaining  but  unspeakable  Turk  ? 

I  speak  thus  strongly,  because  I  feel  thai  in  this  question  the  honor  and 
truth  of  Christ  and  of  the  Bible  are  involved  ;  because  every  one  who 
advocates  prohibition  flings  an  insult  in  the  face  of  the  Lord :  every  such 
advocate  declares  that  the  religion  of  Christ  is  insufficient  and  needs  sup- 
plementing. And  because  I  feel  that  this  whole  prohibition  movement  is  a 
retrograde  sten  in  our  civilization,  our  religion,  our  liberty.  It  is  a  return- 
ng  to  "  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements  of  the  law;"  it  is  destructive  of 
'  .lie  right  of  private  judgment ;"  it  is  just  another  species  of  "priestcraft 
and  popery."  I  no  more  want  to  l)e  told  what  articles  of  food  are  prohibited 
than  I  wt.nt  to  be  told  what  books  are  placed  on  the  "  prohibition  list  "  of 
the  Index  Expurgatorius.  I  do  not  want  to  belong  to  a  nation  of  slaves.  I 
do  not  want  a  new  Gospel. 

With  regard  to  thc-e  who  from  conscientious  motives  choose  to  practice 
the  sell -denial  of  total  abstinence,  either  because  they  find  it  better  for 
themselves,  or  because  they  would  set  an  example  to  others,  I  have  nothing 
but  feelings  of  the  highest  respect  and  admiration.  Only  let  them  remember 
that  self-denial  is  one  thing,  denial  to  others  a  ve/y  different  thing.  St. 
Paul  appreciated  tins  differ  once  He  says,  indeed  :  "If  meat  uiuko  my 
brother  to  offend,  I  will  not  eat  meat  while  the  world  staijdetb,"  There  is 
the  spirit  of  self-denial.  But  St.  Paul  does  not  .say  "  I  will  ^ut  no  meats, 
and  1  will  see  that  nobody  else  shall,  and  I  will  agitate  to  get  laws  passed 
to  that  effect.  '  No,  his  language  is,  "  L;  t  net  him  that  eateth  despise  him 
that  eateth  not  ;  and  let  not  him  that  eateth  not  judge  him  that  eateth." 
"  Happy  is  he  that  condemncta  not  himself  in  that  thing  wh'ch  he  allow- 
etli."  Indeed,  he  warns  us  that  the  "  prohibition  '  spirit  will  be  a  sign  of 
the  de  lensio  i  fnan  the  Truth  :  he  says  that  "  In  the  latter  limes  some  shall 
depart  from  the  faith  .  .  .  forbidding  to  marr\  and  covimanding  to 
abstain  from  meats."  St.  Paul  himself  did  not  marry  ;  ho  advi.eed  others  to 
abstain  from  'narriage,  but  he  did  not  '  forbid."'  There  are  many  earnest, 
saintly  men  and  women  devoted  to  0"lil)acy.  There  are  many  clergymen  of 
the  English  Church  who,  for  the  lov  c  of  God  and  of  His  work,  have  deter- 
irined  never  to  marry— some  who  bave  taken  pledgos  to  that  effect.  I  honor 
and  venerate  the  holy  zeal  of  such  mm  :  but  if  they  were  ever  to  attempt  to 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE  OF  CHRIST. 


79 


pass  a  Canon  of  Synod — as  was  done  in  the  Middle  Ages— forbidding  all 
clergymen  to  marry,  I  think  most  Churchmen  would  resist  such  an  act  of 
tyranny  unto  the  death. 

If  I  am  asked,  "  Will  not  such  doctrines  encourage  the  drunkards?"  I 
answer  no;  for  they  are  the  doctrines  of  Scripuire.  "  Yea,  let  God  be  true, 
though  every  man  a  liar. "  If  I  am  asked,  "  Will  you  not  admit  that  drunk- 
enness would  diminish  if  not  disappear,  were  the  temptation  jjlaced  out  of 
men's  reach  ?  "  I  answer,  most  certainly,  of  course.  If  the  tree  of  knowl- 
edge had  been  placed  out  of  the  reach  of  Adam  and  Eve  they  would  never 
have  fallen.  But  that  was  not  God's  way  of  training  Ills  children,  and  it  is 
not  His  way  now.  We  must  face  temptation,  battle  with  it,  and  overcome 
it  by  the  (irace  of  God,  ''which  we  must  learn  at  all  times  to  ask  for  by 
diligent  prayer." 

You  will  observe,  brethren,  I  have  orJy  been  speaking  against  prohibition, 
which  I  hold  to  be  not  only  unscriptuv  j  but  anti-scriptural,  an  infringe- 
ment of  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made  us  free.  I  would  not  speak 
one  word — God  forbid — in  depreciation  of  any  honest,  constitutional  scheme 
for  reforming  the  drunkard,  for  punishing  the  drunkard,  or  for  diminishing 
the  amount  of  this  sin  and  its  attendant  evils.  I,  myself,  have  r.ot  much 
faith  in  the  majority  of  these  schemes.  I  believe  there  is  one  great  remedy 
for  this  sin,  as  for  all  other  sins,  and  that  is  the  Grace  of  Christ,  which 
we  must  obtain  by  using  the  means  of  Grace.  Still,  so  long  as  Christian 
men  and  women  labor  on  this  behalf,  on  any  lines  consistent  with  the 
liberty  of  the  Gospel,  though  I  might  not  personally  approve  their  par- 
ticular method,  I  would  bid  them  God-speed, 

And  now  dismissing  this  subject,  and  turning  our  eyes  again  to  the  more 
grateful  conten.plation  of  the  Light  of  the  World  as  manifested  in  this 
miracle,  let  us  view  that  loving  and  beautiful  character,  that  Godhead 
veiled  in  flesh,  scattering  his  blessings  in  the  midst  of  this  humble  yet  joy- 
ous gathering  in  Cana  of  Galilee.  Let  us  see  Him  who  "  came  not  to  be 
ministered  unto  but  to  minister,"  enhancing  the  enjoyments  of  this  happy 
throng,  and  showing  how  to  carry  out  the  injunction  of  the  Epistle  for  the 
day  :  "  Rejoice  with  them  that  do  rejoice,  and  weep  with  them  that  wti])." 
Let  I'.o  see  in  this  first  miracle  that  He  wrought,  not  only  an  act  of  love  and 
goodness,  but  a  type  of  His  whole  work  and  office.  He  came  into  this  world 
to  bless,  and  enoble,  und  sanctify  human  nature  ;  to  turn  curses  into  bless- 
ings ;  to  turn  the  ordinary  blessings  which  surround  the  daily  lift'  of  each 
of  us  into  still  higher,  and  holier,  and  sweeter  blessings  ;  to  turn  the  water 
into  wine.  And  he  came  to  show  us  that  He  keeps  the  good  wine  \intil  the 
last.  For  great  and  niavvellous  as  have  been  the  humanizing,  and  civili/injr 
and  elevating,  and  ennobling  effects  of  His  religion  even  on  this  earth,  they 
are  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory  which  shall  be  revealed  in 
us,  when  this  creation  shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corrupri(m 
into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God;  when  the  marriage  of  the 
Lamb  shall  have  come:  when  He  Himself  shall  drink  the  new  wine  with 
us  in  the  Ivingdom  of  God. 


